Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
A look at the philosophies behind two great cultures
Published on March 4, 2004 By Draginol In International

Blogs occasionally seem to have a Europe vs. United States mentality. I've seen it since the beginning of blogging. Why is that? Why is so much scorn reserved for Americans from Europeans? Why is such contempt shown for Europeans? I think I have the answer: Drastically different philosophies on life.

Europeans are focused on fairness. Americans are focused on freedom.  Europeans look at Americans as a bunch of uncultured barbarians running amok in their country and worse, through the world spreading their vulgar culture around. Americans see Europeans as a bunch of sissies whose people meekly except regulations and massive taxation in an effort to make life more "fair" for everyone.  The American response would typically be "Hey, life ain't fair!" to which the European might answer "But it should be!" And so it goes from there.

But because so many Europeans like individual Americans (and vice versa) the argument usually gets shifted to the "administrations" of the various countries.  The typical American is a nice guy right? It's not his fault that the United States is full of gun toting, capital punishment supporting, SUV driving, CO2 producing zealots. What do you expect with Bush in charge? And "Old Europe" is a mess not because of the typical Belgian or German or Frenchman, it's cynical and corrupt politicians like Chirac or Schroeder that make it seem so crummy to us.

What both fail to realize that in a democracy, the people get what they want. Sometimes it takes awhile but eventually their cultures will get a government that represents them. Some people are aghast that the United States has capital punishment. But an overwhelming majority of Americans supports capital punishment. So we elect leaders who support it. Both Kerry and Bush support capital punishment. They have to. They wouldn't get elected otherwise. But why do Americans support capital punishment? Because we're a bunch of "Cowboys"? No. It's because we believe in having a great deal of freedom in our lives but we also believe that freedom comes with a price -- personal responsibility.

Great freedom requiring personal responsibility is one of the cornerstones of American culture. And it is a relatively foreign concept to Europeans (not personal responsibility but the relationship between the two).  We pretty much allow people to do what they want here.  You can own a gun with few exceptions. There are few regulations in being an entrepreneur.  But at the same time, there are few regulations to keep a company from simply bombing on its own.  People in the United States aren't taxed very much relatively speaking. They're free to make decisions on how they want to spend the money they earn. But on the other side of the coin, they also are free to make poor choices and end up in the gutter.

I don't mean this as a criticism of Europe but Europeans have never had the kinds of freedoms Americans have. Even today. It was, after all, a big reason why so many Europeans came to the United States in the first place. The US government is formed on the basis of the federal government essentially providing a handful of essential services. It's actually the weakest central government in the industrialized world in terms of its domestic power. But Europeans have not demanded the kinds of freedoms Americans want. A European might correctly point out that too much freedom leads to chaos and anarchy. And that Europeans have chosen to pull back a bit from the brink that Americans seem so readily to jump over in order to try to create a more just society.

Remember, the French revolution cry was not freedom or death as it was in the United States. It was split amongst 3 principles: liberty, equality, fraternity. Much of "old Europe" could be described in this way. The government exists to help make things more fair -- more equal. It's not fair for some people to be incredibly rich while others are incredibly poor. A European would look at the gap between the richest Americans and the poorest Americans as evidence that the American system isn't working. An American would look at the same evidence and point out that it is working as designed. The only concern Americans would have is if the rich got rich from cheating the system in some way. Americans, generally, do not envy the rich because they believe they have a shot at being one of them if they play their cards right. And even if they don't, odds are they'll end up doing pretty well.

The descendants of Europe who live in the United States have a significantly better standard of living than anywhere else in the world. And the American system works so well that descendents from Africa have the highest standard of living of any people with African heritage in the world -- despite having been slaves only a bit over a century ago. But there's a catch (isn't there always?) The poorest Americans live pretty darn poorly compared to people in similar situations in Europe. If life were an obstacle course where 90% of the people were able to compete it and 10% didn't, the 90% in the US are rewarded far more than the 90% in Europe. But at the same time, the 10% who can't do it suffer more in the US than they do in Europe. So which path do you take?

As an American, I've been instilled with its cultural values. So I prefer freedom to fairness. I have sympathy for those who haven't been able to make the cut in American society but I also don't want to see our freedoms further eroded in order to prop them up. I don't like the way things are in "old Europe". My views aren't shared by all Americans. But they are shared by most Americans. And vice versa in Europe. And the result of democracy in action (or representative government if you're anal retentive) is that the system is set up to reflect our values -- just like the French and Germans and Belgians and so on have governments that reflect theirs. And that's a good thing.


Comments (Page 6)
11 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 8  Last
on Apr 20, 2004
That would probably be because in some other chapter it says, and I quote: "Thou shalt be free to not give a damn about thy neighbor".


I am interested to have the precise reference of this quote.
on Apr 20, 2004
Well, it's right in between the chapters "Sarcasm in the Holy Land - A journey of discovery" and "The Second Coming of Babylon and other examples of Irony". It takes a bit of looking but as it said in the bible, and again I quote: "Search and thou shalt find".

Don't hesitate to ask if you have trouble finding this one as well.
on Apr 20, 2004
Sorry, but I haven't any clue where to find "Thou shalt be free to not give a damn about thy neighbor", unless it is some twisted translations of one of the tenth commandments
on Apr 20, 2004
Everytime when i turn on a socialist news network (bbc, cnn, etc) they always say the usa is (conquring the land) instead of liberating:
liberating: destroy and replace govnment
conquering: actually taking over the pple and establishing cities and such.

if we conqure then we wouldnt waste our time, we would kill anyone that gets in our way, liberating isnt that simple tho.

all i heard was where were thos wmds? WELL DUH. HE USED THEM ON HIS OWN PPLE AND SENT MISSILES TO ISRAEL, WOULD U LIKE SOME OF THE REMAINS OF THOUSANDS DEAD TO PROVE HE HAD THEM? WMDS ALSO INCLUDES: NUCLEAR, BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS.

history: japan ( which the usa bombed to the ground) usa then makes that country 2nd learget economy on world.

history: germany (whch the usa LIBERATED SINCE I DONT THING GERMANY IS PART OF THE USA NOW OR EVER WAS) got bombed to the ground and guess wut, its among the top 5 largest economies.


Funny, I thought liberating was about helping people to be free. To "destroy and replace government" paints a slightly different image I'm sure you'll agree.

You sure liberated Japan, didn't you? To actually conquer them you would have had to actually invade the country, which was just not going to happen. I'm sure all the Japanese felt very happy when they got bombed and loved the Americans for it. Winning a war is not liberation and you are foolish to believe it to be so. War is war and don't try and make yourselves out to be some kind of wonderful country just because you won one.

As for Germany, how exactly did you liberate them? Did you lose over 27 million fighting them and then over a million fighting in the streets of Berlin to take the city? No, but Russia did. They were the ones that defeated Germany.
As for the Western front, put it this way, if your friend needs say $10 million to save his business and you give him $5 million and other people give him $5 million, who saved the business? You alone? You could not have liberated France, Belgium and the Netherlands (which seem to me the ones that were liberated in WWII as they wanted to not be under their current rule) without the rest of the Allies, just as they could not have done it without the US.

As for Iraq, sure there may well be WMD there that we can't find. But no-one has found one in my room yet, so does that mean I have them? Until they are found they don't exist, and the whole war was based on something that didn't exist and is illegal.
on Apr 20, 2004
As for Iraq, sure there may well be WMD there that we can't find. But no-one has found one in my room yet, so does that mean I have them? Until they are found they don't exist, and the whole war was based on something that didn't exist and is illegal.


Much like the war against Milosevic. We all kept hearing how there were mass graves and how thousands and thousands of people were being ethnically cleansed, but that's not what there was. All the recent wars have been fought based on lies.
on Apr 20, 2004
Super Baby,
thousands and thousands of people were ethnically cleaned. The following are various estimates, ranging from the US government to the UN

U.S. State Dept.:250,000 (Bosnia and Herzegovina Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1996 (www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/1996_hrp_report/bosniahe.html)
UN: 200,000
Times [London]: 200,000, (incl Sarajevo: 15,000 , Massacred in Srebrenica: 8,000)
MEDIAN: ca. 175,000
International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights: more than 160,000 (Annual Report 1997 [http://www.ihf-hr.org/ar97bos.htm])

As for mass graves,
4,700 bodies exhumed in one grave alone in Srebrenica

Why do you think this war was a lie? The proof is there.

Paul.
on Apr 20, 2004
conquering: actually taking over the pple and establishing cities and such.


nonsense. All we have to do is install a puppet government and exploit their resources. That fits the definition of conquest pretty squarely in this day and age. And isn't this what Bush has been trying to do? Afterall, there are two kinds of democratic governments. One elected by the people, and another one appointed by America.
on Dec 23, 2005
I was watching a session of the Brittish governments debate where the leaders of both parties, the Torries and the Labour debate. It was shocking to hear the issues they argued about. They argued that under thier welfare system dependancy was growing. I cant remember at what level it was percentage, but it was outrageous. Americans would never stand for something like its. Arguing over a sysytem that creates dependancy? They were blaming each other, instaead to realizing that the system was a piece if Shi@!
on Dec 23, 2005

Why is such contempt shown for Europeans?

Europeans are focused on fairness. Americans are focused on freedom. Europeans look at Americans as a bunch of uncultured barbarians running amok in their country and worse, through the world spreading their vulgar culture around. Americans see Europeans as a bunch of sissies whose people meekly except regulations and massive taxation in an effort to make life more "fair" for everyone. The American response would typically be "Hey, life ain't fair!" to which the European might answer "But it should be!" And so it goes from there.



You are correct sir, that is why.
on Dec 23, 2005
people in Europe really do not like being frequently reminded of the negative past. Especially when European ideals and outlooks are frequently critised by those same people. You can't demonise France and Germany for opposing war in Iraq on one hand and then demonise their WW2 history in another. Their modern outlook is strongly linked to their history and experience. Likewise you can;t demonise their WW2 behaviour and then critise their freedom of speech laws. You must look at everything in conjunction. You must also realise that Europe has moved beyond WW2. Comparing the current world against WW2 is wrong. Just because millions were exterminated in WW2 does not make it acceptable to Europeans that even 1 can be executed today.


We do not demonize either France or Germany for their WW2 history. We DO however demonize "Hitler".
on Dec 23, 2005

You can't demonise France and Germany for opposing war in Iraq on one hand and then demonise their WW2 history in another.


I think you can.

As long as France and Germany always end up supporting the guy with the moustache who attacks his neighbours and gases people, we can certainly demonise them for it; regardless of why they happen to support that guy at the particular moment.
on Dec 23, 2005

Europe does take action when it feels the need to. It took action in the Balkans France took action in Sierra Leone. It took action in Haiti.


Which pretty much destroys the image of the pacifist idealists.
on Dec 23, 2005
Since USA claims links with christianity ("in god we trust"), I would like to know how the emphasis on Freedom works with the following scriptures:


That would probably be because in some other chapter it says, and I quote: "Thou shalt be free to not give a damn about thy neighbor".

The most profound truth about the bible is that it can be used to prove the points of any side in any conflict, which renders it completely worthless in any intelligent discussion.


So according to "your" logic, we (the US) don't help anyone, ever? Is that correct?
on Dec 23, 2005
Wow, this is quite an intense articulate article with equally articulate and intense replies.

Heres mine.

USA rules. Europe sucks!

Hows that for American culturalism?

Buwhahhwhaha
on Oct 10, 2008

Not sure if this was some anti EU troll blog or what but here goes.

  The UK average wage is $42,000 a year with 4.8 weeks payed leave. The average wage in the USA is $38,000 a year and no payed leave.

  The UK has less than 500 people living rough per evening and 0 long term rough sleepers. The USA has 860,000 long term sleeping rough and up to 1.5 million people sleeping rough per evening.

  The UK has 46% of people in university, the USA has less than 33%.

  If the UK and the USA both had the same population the USA would not be able to compete with the UK, therefore the Uk is a better ran, more free and far far more fair country than the USA. Also a more successful country.

  If the USA had 60 million people and the UK 300 million, we would not be talking as the USA would be so far behind we would struggle to remember who exactly you are.

  The UK is 10 years ahead fo the USA whichever way you look at it, I am afraid.

 

11 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 8  Last