Eh, ignorance is a universal export. Don't be foolish and stoop to indicting entire countries because of a loud boor.
By the way, "would of" => "would have." PROTIP: always ensure rants about another's ignorance and/or stupidity are themselves flawless in grammar and spelling. The canonical example being, "Your an idiot."
Comment from: Member
I say American because the most people I catch saying it are American, it is extremely rare I come across one who doesn't. I think this is a fair generalisation. After all one can only generalise when talking about 300 million people, that should be obvious, further clarification shouldn't be required.
I watch a fair amount of US television and aside from a few newscasters who either say Great Britain or the United Kingdom, the use of England to refer to the UK is extremely widespread. Of course that alone in no way compares the US to the rest of the world, but as the US produces the most English-language content it is only to be expected that it gets picked up more.
I expect that if I did a post saying that British children weren't as good at math as their German or French counterparts I wouldn't get any comments calling me a "fool" for generalising. Funny that.
Using someone's grammar or spelling to try and undermine their position is utterly cheap which is why you won't see me doing it on this blog. I don't present myself as an expert in the English language - I have no qualifications in English, nor have any training as a writer. I always attack the content of what somebody is saying, not how they're saying it, as should everybody else, after all you can only prove they're not very good at English by attacking their language, which probably wasn't the topic of debate. That said, I obviously try to improve my writing skills.
I too hesitate to pick on one's grammar or spelling, since, as you say, it's cheap and essentially an ad-hominem irrelevant to the issues raised. But as I said, when picking on ignorance, I say it's fair game.
But some are ignorant of "arcane" points of language, and others of "arcane" points of international nomenclature. Arcane, of course, is in the eye of the beholder—surely few UK citizens would confuse the UK, Britain, and England, but many outside it (e.g. many in the US) will use the three terms interchangeably because one rarely discusses a part and not the whole (see: synecdoche; cf. Holland/the Netherlands or US/"America".)
For example, in your original post, you say: "Hopefully now his corrections will go on to further educate those Americans..." but surely the chaps in South America have done nothing to earn your ire? (Although to be fair, there is no good adjective for "citizen of the US" or "citizen of the UK").
Anyway one can rightly indict a majority of the US populace for ignorance, based on its president.