Bah, that's nothing, we have one in Chile (plus the coach), one in Mexico, one in Italy and two in Paraguay (plus the coach). 4 different nations not including ours. Beat that
Bah, that's nothing, we have one in Chile (plus the coach), one in Mexico, one in Italy and two in Paraguay (plus the coach). 4 different nations not including ours. Beat that

| zexen_lowe said: Bah, that's nothing, we have one in Chile (plus the coach), one in Mexico, one in Italy and two in Paraguay (plus the coach). 4 different nations not including ours. Beat that |
I would but I dont know the entire list. I heard it was more than 4, but I dont remember where. I will try to find the info.


I wrote a comment 5 o'clock in the morning as a quotation and I lost it. I was so frustrated and tired that I didn't write it again, but I will try to make a summary.
As Zexen correctly said America is called like it due to an italian cartographer called Amerigo Vespucci. Spanish people had a tradition of translating first names (Federico Nietzsche, Guillermo Shakespeare, things like that), so they called him Américo Vespucio. He did some research and he proved that the lands to which Columbus had arrived by sailing through the west were not India nor China, but a "new" continent. He did this by analizing the brazilian coastline. So if any of the two continents formed by the tectonic plates should be called America, that should be the southern one, that is, the one that was designated as America by the spanish people thanks to brazilian coastline.
I am not saying USA should change its name, that's ridiculous. I am just saying that America is divided in South, Central and North, but all of those countries are americans.
Somebody asked why was all of this such a big deal. I can see how this is difficult for those who aren't south americans. It has to do with the fact that our countries have been european colonies, and after that, USA has succesfully been involved in the economical and political issues of other americans countries: its goal was to help its own best interest. That's what we call neocolonialism. You should also consider what we call cultural colonialism and the fact that some traditions refer to the caribean and South America as USA backyard, and you may get the picture. We feel it is important for us to defend our identity as americans, we feel its a kind of violence not to be recognised as them. "America isn't just the United States" is like the proletariat saying "society does not only include burguesy".
Anyway, this issue is not as important as it was for me many years ago, but I do respect people who think of it as a sensible issue.
marciosmg said:
I personally have complained about this a couple of times, but I dont honestly care about that very much. Here in Brazil, people dont call themselves americans at all. They always use it when referencing people from the US. I have seen on CNN in Spanish, refering to americans as "estadunidenses" (something like united stadians in english). Do you that in Argentina, Zexen? |
We call them "gringos" but anyway I'm so screwed with my predictions skills
Actually that Amerigo Vespucci theory we all learned in school may not be true. Scholars now think it was named after a Welshman called John Amerike. From Wikipedia (and QI):
Summary:
Seems pretty convincing, but the most convincing bit, mentioned on the BBC TV show QI, is that countries were never named after their discoverer's first name unless they were monarchs or saints eg the Cook islands after captain cook, Bolivia after Simón de Bolivar and so on. In fact check out the wikipedia list of countries named after people. I don't think there's a single one named for a first name other than those of monarchs, saints and biblical characters. Completely and utterly off topic but interesting nonetheless.
Come on, Holland, you gotta win this match, I have everything betted on you...
Kuyt is beyond useless

We got lucky with the first goal, but after that Holland totally dominated the match, and that kid Elia is really something interesting. Anyway, not a spectacular debut, but a solid one nonetheless, I expect Holland to play much better when Robben can play

| kennyrester said: Actually that Amerigo Vespucci theory we all learned in school may not be true. Scholars now think it was named after a Welshman called John Amerike. From Wikipedia (and QI): Summary:
Seems pretty convincing, but the most convincing bit, mentioned on the BBC TV show QI, is that countries were never named after their discoverer's first name unless they were monarchs or saints eg the Cook islands after captain cook, Bolivia after Simón de Bolivar and so on. In fact check out the wikipedia list of countries named after people. I don't think there's a single one named for a first name other than those of monarchs, saints and biblical characters. Completely and utterly off topic but interesting nonetheless. |
That's a quite interesting theory and I had never heard of it. Thanks for the info.
Anyhow, regardless of where it originally came from, I think is easy to understand that many versions co-exist for hundreds of years and is licit for all of the inhabitants of America to ask for their identity recognition.
marciosmg said:
Germany, Portugal (they have 3!), USA, Brazil (lol). In fact, I heard today that most of Germany's team are people from other countries. Klose and Podolski are from poland for example. |
Sort of like Australia in RL.
They don't have Brasilians just a lot of pacific islanders