<<contrary to ideas of some sort of coherent "Anglosphere" or like.>>
Political issues aside, I usually just use the phrase "Anglosphere" for "English-speaking countries" because it seems less bulky and awkward than the latter. I just wanted to point out that regardless of whatever unity or non-unity within the "Anglosphere," I always just use the term in a simple linguistic sense.
Kirk, I wasn't saying that you meant such, but rather just the concept of some kind of culturally and or politically interconnected "English-speaking world" which some happen to believe in for some reason. However, from the perspective here, the only thing that "we", so to speak, have in common with the rest of such, except for Canada, of course, is one common language. I myself at least don't perceive things here as being merely some kind of extension of the UK, unlike some see, say, Australia; rather, for most purposes, I couldn't care less about the UK, and see things here as having no more in common with such than, say, with Germany, or any other random western European country for that matter, once one ignores the matter of language.
That should be "but rather I was just referring to the concept of" above.
>...could you tell me why there is so much anglophones who get upset in France because we don't speak english.... [bernard]
I tried to speak French myself, so all I can do is guess. I assume that they are upset for the simple reason that they have a problem of some sort and need to be understood. Whatever the reason -- and however blameless the French may be about it -- not being understood tends to upset people. That would explain comments like "Don't you understand English?" or "Doesn't anybody here understand English?"
>...some kind of culturally and or politically interconnected "English-speaking world" which some happen to believe in for some reason.... [Travis]
I'm puzzled by that statement. It seems to me that there are many signs that the United States and the UK are closely connected both culturally and politically. When I was in high school (besides the English that we had in other years) we devoted equal time -- one year each -- to historical surveys of American and British literature. That's how important the British contributions to our culture were considered.
Also, though Americans fought the British in both the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, their political institutions are clearly part of the same political tradition. Once the early troubles were past, the two countries were seen as natural allies. The fact that they were on the same side in WWI and WWII is no surprise. Fighting on different sides would have been almost inconceivable. (Also there was little sympathy here for the Argentine junta during the Falklands War.)
Theoretically any country that's pursuing a common goal -- at least temporarily -- can be an ally (as Stalin's USSR was during WWII), but the common traditions that the US and UK share have made their alliance closer than most.
I do know a lot of people who wish everyone just spoke English. I'm not one of them, but I do realize how lucky I am that I grew up with 'la lingua franca' (how is that spelled? and what language is that?), since I'm not as pressed to learn other languages.
But I am, Chinese and Spanish at the moment.
Gjones, actually, about World War 1, the American public wasn't particularly enthusiastic about entering that conflict, and it took a lot to get them to actually accept such, after quite a while (weren't it not for the German navy not torpedoed the Lusitania and the intercept of the Zimmermann telegram, they probably wouldn't have accepted it), and even in the case of World War 2, it took the whole Pearl Harbor thing to, well, get people to be a wee bit less isolationistic, to so speak. One may look back in retrospect and say that the US sided with the UK in both conflicts, but that is an after the fact matter (whether they should of or not is another story; in the case of WW1, I think the US should have stayed out, period, whereas I think the US was too slow to enter WW2).
And again, while English political philosophers definitely had a significant influence here early on, that doesn't mean that the overall culture here is defined by such one bit. Also, remember that the whole "special relationship" is primarily a matter of superficial politics and economics, both presently and historically, and has little to do with most individuals' identification culturally per se. I see little reason to identify at all on a personal with the UK here in southeastern Wisconsin; it's just that English has taken the role of lingua franca par excellence here, and that's that, but that is no reason at all to perceive the UK as some kind of "mother country" in itself.
As for the literature thing, that's simply because the US and England (and much of Scotland and Wales) do share a single language, so of course overall there is going to be a general shared body of literature, especially because some of such (Shakespeare for instance) predates the overall political split and whatnot.