I don't even like Trump, but this "renaming" is neutral at worst, inclusive at best.
The term "Gulf of Mexico" has been in common use for over 400 years, long before the US was even a thing. No one had a legitimate problem with the name.
The last five to ten years of activist similarly told us these things don't matter though. Doesn't matter that "blacklist" or "master" has nothing to do with Black people or slavery. We had to change them to more inclusive terms anyway.
>The term "Gulf of Mexico" has been in common use for over 400 years, long before the US was even a thing.
The exact same was said about "blacklist" and "master", among others.
>No one had a legitimate problem with the name.
Someone did, evidenced by the change. Or are you saying we shouldn't give in to the activists pushing this change? How ironic.
gulf of america is not more inclusive. the "renaming" was not meant to be inclusive, it was very clearly meant to be divisive.
this is a similar argument to one often used when people call canadians americans: "umm, ackshully, canada is in north america, so it's correct to call them americans"
and of course the flaw in that argument is that literally nobody on earth considers canadians to be americans except people on the internet trying to sound smart.
Sure it is. Mexico is not the only country in the Americas that has a maritime border on this body of water.
And I don't like the stink of arbitrary dictators renaming things for ego or propaganda reasons. This is the sort of thing North Korea or Turkmenbashi would do, and I think that's pathetic for America.
Sure it is. Mexico is not the only country in the Americas that has a maritime border on this body of water. Gulf of America is a more accurate and inclusive name. In the spirit of inclusivity we should keep it, just like we should keep "blocklist" and "main."
Frankly I just think it's a waste of time and energy. I'm referring both to the original action, as well as the continuing ramp up of divisiveness.