The European Dream

[Nono]

The frequent and mutual incomprehension between Europeans and North Americans is something that has interested me for a long time. I was born and raised in North America in an ultra-Anglo family that had already been there for a couple of generations. So Europe was in lots of ways a strange place when I came here all those years ago. Now it’s home and when I go back it’s North America that seems strange – while strangely familiar.

This period of post-US-election stagnation seems like a good time for this discussion. The triumphant and triumphalist American right wing know perfectly well that about half the country voted against them and that about the entire rest of the world hoped they’d lose. They’re pretty scathing about the rest of the world, aren’t they? And the rest of the world is shaking its collective head and trying to understand how this can happen.

A couple of weeks ago Jeremy Rifkin gave Swiss TV an hour-long interview about his new book The European Dream. I took some notes and have written them up because I was struck by the way Rifkin elucidates something that many millions of people on both sides of the Atlantic are wondering about. Here then is the gist. (It’s only fair to point that his voice went unheard throughout the entire interview, which he conducted with the aid of an interpreter. So this is not only a drastic summary but a translation as well – i.e. not Rifkin’s actual words. Bold print always looks a bit loud so I’ll put it into quotes, though strictly speaking it ain’t.)

Until the 60s-70s the American Dream more or less functioned as advertised: if you worked hard you had a good chance of making it and giving your children things you didn’t have. Today the US is 24th among industrialized countries in terms of gap between rich and poor. (In this respect, things are worse only in Mexico and Russia.) A third of Americans now say they don’t believe in the American Dream. There is a myth, unfortunately accepted by many Europeans, that the US is a dynamic economic colossus, whereas Europe is a sclerotic mess on the skids. But in Europe an extraordinary experiment is underway: 455 million people in 25 countries ranging from the Irish Sea to the Russian border building an economic and political union. Throughout history all other such constructs – including the US itself – were founded on a basis of exploitation and violence. After a thousand years of conflict culminating in two world wars, however, the Europeans stood back and said “Things can’t go on this way – we have to find a way to work together.” This is something completely new, and we don’t even know exactly what it is. The EU isn’t a nation state, it’s more of a network intended to bring the international into harmony with the local. Americans think they live in the world’s greatest country. Any mistakes belong to the past – they’re optimistic. But Europeans suffer from an inferiority complex. They only ever talk about Europe’s failures. The reality, however, is that the EU – not the US – is today the world’s biggest export market and has the largest home market. Over 20% more of the world’s top companies are European than American. Fourteen of the 20 leading banks are European. Europe leads in a whole range of major industries, from civil aviation to construction to food. Today companies in Germany (the most powerful economy force in the EU) view themselves as European, not simply German – just as companies in California (the most powerful economy in the US) view themselves as American, not just Californian. The Germans are now subject to pan-European regulations, just as the Californians are to American ones. Some Europeans say “Wait a minute – Europe is sclerotic, suffers high unemployment, etc. We should look to the US to see how to generate economic growth. The US has carried out radical reforms and largely dismantled the welfare state, lowered taxes and spurred capital flows, and in so doing has created a lean, competitive economy. What a power house!” But this ignores what has made the US economy strong over the past dozen years. What lifted it out of the 1989-92 recession? Flooding the country with credit cards, that’s what. People began purchasing like crazy on credit. The average American family’s saving rate has dropped in the past dozen years from 8% to less than 2%. Today, more Americans are affected by bankruptcy than by divorce, heart attacks or … school diplomas. Does that sound like a sturdy economy? It’s built completely on debt. The proof? The euro. In 1999 the Americans were snickering and saying that in six months time it’d be used as toilet paper. How is it that the euro has remained strong while the dollar has done nothing but sink? The answer is that investors no longer trust the dollar, seeing as how the US public is so deeply in debt and the US government has cut taxes while printing money to increase spending, thus sinking deep into debt itself. And has this somehow created jobs? Even in the glorious 90s, the effective unemployment rate in the US was 9% -- about the same as in Europe. How is that? Well, millions of Americans dropped out of the labour market and thus out of the statistics. Some found work again, yes, but many for only a couple of hours a week. They count as employed. We also stuck about two million people into prison: some 2% of the male work force. The fact is that over the past four years the US has lost, in net terms, 1.6 million jobs. When people say Europe should listen to the Americans because they know how to crank up the economy and create jobs, I tell them where such policies lead: enormous debt for your children, but no jobs for them. There is a lot of talk about Eurosclerosis and a dysfunctional labour market there. But Europe has a Golden Goose: integration. What it needs is to take full advantage of its size, with: · A single transport grid. · A single energy-supply system. · A single communication system. · A single body of legislation regulating the economy and commerce. · A single language – English – for the running of that economy. If you can manage that, you’ll be much better prepared for success in the emerging, technology-driven, network economy and you’ll be able to consolidate your achievements in the realm of collective welfare. And Europe should be careful not to sacrifice those achievements: · Education – America may, currently, have the best universities in the world, but the European public school system is way ahead, with far better results in mathematics and science. · Health care – You live a full year longer than we do on average. You have more doctors per head of population. You have a lower infant-mortality rate (the US has only the 27th best rate in the world owing to higher poverty). · Leisure – We have two weeks of paid holiday per year, you have four, and more statutory holidays. So you have more time to enjoy life than we do. · Murders – We have four times as many as you. · Prisoners – Twenty-five per cent of the world’s prisoners are in the US. Yes, maybe we’re richer than you are – for the moment. But you have a higher quality of life. My advice: Don’t throw it all away when, through integration, you can consolidate it. The American Dream and the European Dream are fundamentally different. Freedom lies at the centre of both. But when an American says the word “freedom”, he means something quite different from what a European means when he says the same word. The American (this is how his parents have raised him to think) means autonomy, mobility and self-reliance: not to be dependent on any broader community and not to feel responsible for it either. For Europeans (that’s how they’ve been raised to think) freedom means relations with and access to the wider community that give your life meaning. These differences are based on respective history. The founders of the American nation arrived from Europe 2-300 years ago at the end of the Reformation and the beginning of the Enlightenment. They brought both these with them; and both have remained basically static in America since. Americans are sons of Europe but with the basic outlook that Europeans had 200 years ago. If the great reformers Jean Calvin or Martin Luther were to come back to Earth today, they would certainly feel more at home in the American heartland than they would in Europe. René Descartes, John Locke and Adam Smith – the architects of the Enlightenment – would likewise feel more at home in America. This also helps explain US militarism: since Reformation Protestantism has remained frozen in time, the idea that evil forces lurk, in perfectly concrete terms, is a strong one in America, as is the notion that there’s no negotiating with them. Contrast this with the European idea of dialogue and cooperation. The Reformation and the Enlightenment were very different things. The former held that you suffer for Christ in this world and you are then redeemed in the next. The latter said: Strive for happiness in this world by accumulating material wealth. So what united these two currents of thought, the one theological and the other philosphical? The individual stood at the centre of both, that’s what. Martin Luther and especially Jean Calvin said: You face God alone -- no ecclesiastical authority comes between you and Him. John Locke said: You are alone in nature. Adam Smith said: You are alone in the marketplace. For the archetypal American frontiersman, this was reality: you and the horizon. He had no social network. So there he was alone with God and solely responsible for his material well-being to boot. No wonder that religion is taken a lot more literally in the States, the most Protestant holy-rolling country in the industrialized world. Having a much more direct, individual relationship with God, Americans are more optimistic and thus more willing to take risks. In Europe on the other hand, the ideal of the individual never really made it. Up to the 18th century society was close-knit: people lived in or around already crowded, walled cities, with a paternalistic Catholic church and a basically feudal-aristocratic system that tempered any idea of individualism. By the time the 20th century rolled around, the idea of income redistribution was already gaining ground, i.e. you might well find yourself alone in the marketplace, but any wealth gained there should also be used for the general good. The American Dream is to amass personal wealth. The Europeans tell us “You’re only interested in money!”. But that isn’t true. Money is a means to ensure freedom. In the States we’re taught from day one to make sure we have enough, because neither state nor society is going to help us if we don’t. Traditonally any boy in America – Ford, Rockefeller, Gates – could become a millionaire. But in Europe, with its feudal history and class-ridden society, it was hard to rise. So people found an alternative: improving the quality of life in society as a whole. America is growth-crazy. No problem: pollute and move on. But Europe is much more into sustainable development, because its geographic limits were reached long ago. Even before the 18th century, Europe was broken down into tiny goegraphical units, with town and land closely linked. People were obliged to learn the value of conservation. Planning came naturally. To conclude, the American Dream says that the individual can successfully shape his own life. The European Dream is collectivist and based on an ideal of the general quality of that life: · There should be no great gap between rich and poor. · Cultural diversity (in this vast potpourri of cultures) should be respected; each has a contribution to make. · Sustainable development and respect for our fellow creatures. · Quality of life for the entire community. · Social and human rights. · World peace. That is the European Dream. And you didn’t even know you had one; you thought only the Americans had a dream. This is a dream, of course, a hope for the future, and like the American one it will never be fully realized. Big deal. The European Dream is the world’s first global, transnational dream. Just consider things like the SARS epidemic, a Wall Street scandal, a worldwide computer virus, and you realize that no man is an island, that the dream of the totally self-reliant individual simply does not work any more. We’re interdependent now. The European Dream is the way forward, not the American Dream.

[The Iconoclast]

A very interesting read. I was born in India, moved to Indonesia, and I now live in the infamous USA. I've gotten a good deal of exposure to Europe through European comics (e.g. Tintin) and I've browsed in forums where a large portion of the people are Europe. I think I could say that I'm a bit more exposed than the average American, but I've never actually set foot on European soil, so maybe I'm only seeing a facade of the reality. In any case, the text seems intriguing, but I'm going to hold off on any final judgements until I hear more opinions.

[edit: hehe, yeah that last sentence IS going to ignite a flame.]

[Pooeypants]

Erm, the ending sentence is probably going to ignite a flame...

[Vee]

can I get a link to that?

[Scribbler1]

"This is a dream, of course, a hope for the future, and like the American one it will never be fully realized. Big deal. The European Dream is the world’s first global, transnational dream"

I mentioned this earlier in response to the prevailing attitude in the states that WE are THE superpower and WE can do whatever we want and to hell with the rest of the world, particularly "old" Europe.
If the EU decides to become unified, it is THEY who will be THE superpower and we may well live to regret our ego-driven superiority complex.

[Compugasm]

When people say Europe should listen to the Americans because they know how to crank up the economy and create jobs, I tell them where such policies lead: enormous debt for your children, but no jobs for them.

Because we're being forced to become exactly like Europe. And we're all (EU + USA) being legislated into a feifdom, or a prison cell, little by little. Every year 10,000 new laws are created in USA. Not wearing a seat belt is a crime, tomatoes that are too small are illegal. Those are two laws, from both our countries, that eventually will put you under control that no man can live under if you carry it to its conclusion.

If Europe has much larger banks, and companies, why do you have an even greater division between rich and poor? Because if Europe is as rich as claimed, there would be no need to improve society as a whole, like you claim we do not.

'pollute and move on. But Europe is much more into sustainable development" I disagree. No-one thought much about it. Was Hilter worried about fuel economy when he built the autobahn? Hasn't Jeremy ever seen photographs of the soot raining down from the factories collecting on hanging laundry? If you look across a city like Los Angeles now, we have visible smog. But turn of the century Nottingham, you couldn't see down the street.

Just as freedom means different things to our countries, so does sustainable development. To Americans, (ok, just me really) that means surviving on your own when the massive infrastructure that has been created, comes crashing down. We are all interrconnected, there is no doubt. Ever go a week without power? We're all too dependant on the interconnected goodies government provides, built on the very empty promises and credit Jeremy blames. Even Jeremy admits that, (yet not mentioning oil) but offers the solution as yet more consolidation of power.

[Nono]

Originally posted by Pooeypants+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Pooeypants)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Erm, the ending sentence is probably going to ignite a flame... [/b]

Yeah, it's like questioning the immaculate conception -- some myths are inviolable. Well, let 'em burn.

<!--QuoteBegin-Comp
We're all (EU + USA) being legislated into a feifdom.[/quote]

If you saw the degree of regulation where I live, you'd probably flip. But I see it as largely positive. I feel absolutely free -- where it counts.

Why do you have an even greater division between rich and poor?

No, you've got it.

Was Hilter worried about fuel economy when he built the autobahn? Hasn't Jeremy ever seen photographs of the soot raining down from the factories collecting on hanging laundry? If you look across a city like Los Angeles now, we have visible smog. But turn of the century Nottingham, you couldn't see down the street.

Interesting choice of comparisons: A. Hitler (compared with whom, Dubbya?); LA today with Nottingham a hundred years ago ... The point is that when you have unlimited space (or think you do) you're more careless. I stood and watched a coal-fired electricity station belching away on the Ohio last year and thought "These guys just don't care." Someday soon I think you'll be forced to.

We're all too dependant on the interconnected goodies government provides, built on the very empty promises and credit Jeremy blames. Even Jeremy admits that, (yet not mentioning oil) but offers the solution as yet more consolidation of power.

I think we're all too dependent -- on both sides of The Pond -- on goodies provided by technology.

As for oil, he didn't mention it but it's a good point. Whereas everybody else in the world has to choose between guns and butter, the US can break the rules and fail to balance its books -- at least so far -- because even nervous investors feel that, well, an economy that size has to be able to pay its debts. The dollar has been the world's reserve currency since WWII after all.

But with the US now borrowing up to 4 billion bucks a day from overseas, while saving practically nothing ("When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping.") and cutting taxes even while launching big military adventures, well sooner or later somebody's going to pull the plug, especially with the euro now waiting in the wings.

The day the euro replaces the dollar as the currency of the oil industry, it won't matter how many boys you have in Fallujah.

[Pooeypants]

Originally posted by Compugasm, Because we're being forced to become exactly like Europe. And we're all (EU + USA) being legislated into a feifdom, or a prison cell, little by little. Every year 10,000 new laws are created in USA. Not wearing a seat belt is a crime, tomatoes that are too small are illegal. Those are two laws, from both our countries, that eventually will put you under control that no man can live under if you carry it to its conclusion.

Sorry to be picky but wearing seatbelts saves many lives. If people refuse to wear it voluntarily then obviously the gov't has to get some action going, I don't think they want needless deaths that could've been prevented by a strap.

[Compugasm]

Originally posted by Pooeypants, Sorry to be picky but wearing seatbelts saves many lives...

I'm glad you picked up on that. Because our arguments are well intentioned, but boil down to either two points of view. Collective vs Individual way of thinking. Seatbelts do save lives. Do you need to be protected from yourself? Because anytime the state wishes to take away your rights, all they have to do is pass a law to do so "for the greater good". It is by this way of thinking we loose our freedom a little bit at a time.

[syracusa]

Originally posted by Nono, A couple of weeks ago Jeremy Rifkin gave Swiss TV an hour-long interview about his new book The European Dream.

That was an incredible description of the Euro-US differences.
I just bought the book from Amazon after reading your notes. (Thanks, Nono...you're bankrupting me; this was the last thing I was supposed to be purchasing right now, when I don't even have a personal income and I am only supppsed to be eating and nothing else... but I couldn't help it; freaking Amazon makes it so easy it's dangerous! ).

But after 7 years of American Dream, I have been longing to return to the European Dream like no tomorrow. It is still not possible for my family to move back there at this moment (practical issues), but we are taking baby steps ...by moving from a red state to a blue state. For now.

Not sure it will make a huge difference, but after 7 years of Southern kitch, cultural emptiness and painful superficialities, I get tears in my eyes when I see pictures from New England, and especially Boston.

I have never even been there but every time I see a Boston picture, it almost feels like Europe. Maybe I'll get lucky... :(

[syracusa]

Originally posted by Compugasm,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Compugasm,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Pooeypants, Sorry to be picky but wearing seatbelts saves many lives...

I'm glad you picked up on that. Because our arguments are well intentioned, but boil down to either two points of view. Collective vs Individual way of thinking. Seatbelts do save lives. Do you need to be protected from yourself? Because anytime the state wishes to take away your rights, all they have to do is pass a law to do so "for the greater good". It is by this way of thinking we loose our freedom a little bit at a time.[/b][/quote]

I think the libertarians exagerate a little bit with some concerns that ...really... don't matter all that much.

The gov. telling you YOU MUST put on your seatbelt is not as close as you think with the gov. paralyzing and monopolizing every one of your free-will based actions.

I think there are bigger things out there to worry about. Really.

[Compugasm]

Originally posted by syracusa, I think the libertarians exagerate a little bit with some concerns that ...really... don't matter all that much.

I agree, seatbelts is not as important as say, "the war on terror" but the authority to decide either course of action is the same.

[castille]

I thought the European Dream was to make the tune for Queer Eye for the Straight Guy part of their national anthem?

Seriously speaking, Europeans and Americans just think differently. Europeans tend to be more into relaxing and doing less work (thus high taxes discourage people to do more work), while Americans have always pushed for achievement.

I frankly dislike the current European attitude that everyone can just take a year-long vacation. Europe's height of power was during a time when everyone was pressured to achieve and excel, and now Europe is turning into a decadent Rome.

Meanwhile Europe's former colonies (excluding African ones) are learning from their mistakes and Europe's own glory, and once they catch up to Europe (2 already have gone beyond Europe's total GDP), it'll be a bit of a wakeup call.

[Nono]

Originally posted by castille Europe is turning into a decadent Rome.

Yeah, peel me a grape while you're at it.
We're enjoying it, though.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Compugasm,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Compugasm,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Pooeypants, Sorry to be picky but wearing seatbelts saves many lives...

I'm glad you picked up on that. Because our arguments are well intentioned, but boil down to either two points of view. Collective vs Individual way of thinking. Seatbelts do save lives. Do you need to be protected from yourself? Because anytime the state wishes to take away your rights, all they have to do is pass a law to do so "for the greater good". It is by this way of thinking we loose our freedom a little bit at a time.[/b][/quote]

(Off-Topic)
I don't want to turn this into the seatbelt thread, but a different example would be clearer for the particular point made.
One thing most people don't consider with seat belt use is that it's not just protecting you from yourself, they protect ME from you. This is why I support personal freedom AND seat belt laws.
When you go through an intersection and a car hits you on either side, the situation changes whether you are personally injured or not. A car hitting you on the driver side can knock you into the other seat and a car hitting you on the passenger side can push the car right out from under you. Either way, you end up a passenger in a moving, driverless 2-3 thousand pound projectile. If I'm standing at the corner and your car decides to head towards ME, neither of us has any power to stop it.

[Compugasm]

That analogy makes as much sense as removing teeth from all the sharks, because one day you might be bitten.

[Scribbler1]

If that sort of thing was a one in a million shot I would agree. However it does happen and therefore should be addressed. It's not the same as Motorcycle helmets.
Personally, I like the idea of staying at the controls, even if my truck were to roll over.

[Nono]

Originally posted by Comp That analogy makes as much sense as removing teeth from all the sharks, because one day you might be bitten.

Absurd. If you could prompt sharks to remove their dentures when near you, then you wouldn't get bitten. It would work.

Here's a question for you. Are you in favour of abolishing speed limits? (For cars, not sharks.)

[Compugasm]

Originally posted by Nono, Here's a question for you. Are you in favour of abolishing speed limits?

You mean, a trick question. As if I advocate no laws at all. Are you talking school and construction zones, straight open freeways at night, city streets, blind corners on country roads? Is it snowing, raining, sunny day? There is a speed limit no matter what, and there are logical situations you can present. Even the famed autobahn has rules.

[Lava]

It struck me that the piece was very one sided, pro european union, which most of us here in Britain are not. Also it struck me as full of holes. I wonder if the writer's case would be at all convincing if the various errors in it were snipped out or corrected.

Lava