What makes Europeans similar between each others, as opposed to Americans

"Americans usually consider that the week starts on Sunday and ends on Saturday, while in Europe it always starts on Monday and finishes on Sunday."

Is this really true? I have always worked on the idea of Sunday being the first day of the week and Saturday the last.
 
In France, the week starts on Monday and finishes on Friday afer the job, when the "apéro" starts...
The week-end is for us Saturday + Sunday...
 
The prom part is simply not true, just look at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prom#Europe

Almost every country holds some special year end party at school, but these practices tend to vary widely from region to region (even within small countries like Belgium) and even from school to school. Americans have institutionalised the prom by giving it well defined rules throughout a huge country. In the USA prom is a national event, one that appears regularly in Hollywood movies and series, that everybody talks about.

In Europe the year end party is often a low key affair, one party among many. People do no dress up in a special formal way for prom. For example, in Belgium there are parties to celebrate the end of the school year in every year of high school (and sometimes even junior high) as well as university. There are parties almost every day in the last two weeks of June. There is usually at least one party held at school every year, but it is not reserved to students in the final year, and it is not held necessarily at the end of the school year (often it is in the middle of the year).
 
I've asked many Americans and most of them say that Monday is the first day of the week, just like in the UK because you start work on Monday, this is when the new week begins.
 
I've asked many Americans and most of them say that Monday is the first day of the week, just like in the UK because you start work on Monday, this is when the new week begins.

Hm, I rarely here among people I know in the US, usually we consider Sunday to be the first day of the week. Maybe those you've talked to have been thinking "work week" rather than "week."
 
I really have to say that British people still use the old English imperial system when talking about distances (miles) , their own personal height (Feet and inches) and weight (stone, pounds and ounces). Also when a baby is born people always say they are X pounds and X ounces never KG.

Also language learning is not compulsory in the UK past the age of 14 by which time they probably know enough to know what's on a basic menu, and the vast majority of kids will have forgotten everything they learned by the time they're 18. My friend did German even until she was 16 (GCSE) and she hardly remembers anything. Learning foreign languages is of next to no importance in the UK because we don't have exposure to non English-Language media or culture. Also, you will never be able to get rid of the 'everyone speaks English anyway' attitude in the UK, and by extension, any English-speaking country.
 
In Europe, the Irish and the Poles are the most religious, then the Spaniards (there have been many surveys about church attendance, belief in god, etc.). But none have the same kind of Christian fundamentalism and extremism as exist in the USA (esp. in the Bible Belt). Spain has even legalised gay marriages without any complaint from the population. Not ready to happen in the States !

Maciamo,
I understand what you said but I dont like the negative spin you put on it and therefore I would like to rephrase.
In America, a large number of people simply feel God in their heart. To them going to church or to the Temple is a normal family activity like in Europe going to the beach.
God also holds a place in most individuals' thoughts during the day.
In the suburbia of New York where I live, I can go to any Sunday mass (from 7:30am to 12pm) and there will always be lots of families with small kids.

In Europe (I know mostly western Europe), it is completely the opposite. God is completely absent from people's thoughts and priorities. Those who go to church (mostly elderly) go by habit, because their parents used to go. Every time I go back to Europe, I really feel God is dead there, while in the US He is very much alive.

So there is more to it than simply counting people claiming to be religious on each continent.
 
I am an American whose family came from Slovakia (father and all grandparents). I was taught by Italian priests in school and had friends as a young person of many different ethnic groups, such as Poles, Italians, Irish, German, etc. I also live in a small town that has a strong Polish influence. Because of this I have given the cultural differences between Americans and Europeans a great deal of thought. Here are my musings:

Conservatism: Americans are actually very conservative. I think this is a very important point in understanding our differences from Europeans. It is also often an overlooked point. Many of the original settlers came to America to escape religious persecution. Those that came for other reasons were very lower class people, usually of the peasant class and naturally religious. Being of peasant stock by the way is a not thought of as an insult in America but a compliment. We became self governing over 400 years ago, way back in 1608 at our first settlement. That was a long time ago. The English King was too far away to have any real control. Nearly two hundred years later, when the English king and parliment tried to increase its control especially over taxes, both the well to do and the poor Americans rose up to defend their traditional liberties. The American revolution of 1776 happened because Americans wanted to conserve their traditional governmental structure free from English interference. When the Americans gained their independence, they used their former governmental experience to form their new nation. There was a much smoother, almost natural flow into the new sense of nationhood. It is often forgotten that in spite of being the "New World," America has the oldest written Constitution and oldest political party in the world. This the mark of a conservative people, one whose government has been basically democratic for over 400 years.

When European revolutions occured, they were a bitter tearing apart of the old and the new. There was a sense that religion had betrayed the people and that the upper classes had to be destroyed. It was a real struggle that had effects that lasted for decades if not centuries. Just look at the French and Russian revolutions. France went through how many republics and empires? Russia still has not recovered from its revolution.

In short, Europeans and Americans have completely different experiences in nation building. Americans want to keep the good thing they have. In my opinion, European sense that a new structuring of society is required.


Religion: American are sincerely religious. It is not a forced thing and is the result of what I noted above, that Americans are basically a conservative people. Even less religious geographical areas still maintain a sense of religion. There are several reasons for this:
a) America was founded to a large degree by religious groups.
b) America's founding document, the Declaration of Independence, uses the argument that there is a supreme Creator who is responsible for our rights as individuals and our right to form a new nation.
c) After the revolution, when our Constitution was being written (1787), it was recognized that the nation was religiously diverse and everyone including Catholics and dissenting religious denominations had contributed to victory. It would be impossible to have a state religion and still have function as a unified nation. In order to have the Constitution adopted it was promised to the people that one of the new government's first acts would be a bill of rights as amendments to the Consitution. The very first right mentioned is religious freedom.
d) Because there was no state religion there was nothing to rebel against. People were free to practice whatever religion they wanted. It did not become a mark of intellectual superiority to reject religion. Religion also played the major role in abolishing slavery and in the Civil rights of the 20th century. In Europe, religion was viewed as a hindrance to progress. In America it is viewed as a tool for human progress.
e) It is surprising how religious people can be. This ranges from having a crucifix or bible on your office desk to saying grace before eating a Big Mac at McDonald's.
f) The clergy in America, even the Catholics, never lived in opulance and wealth as many once did in Europe. Often the clergy shared the people's struggle, even to the point of traveling with them to America from the ancestoral village back in Europe.
g) Politicans can mention God easily without any shame. After the attacks of 9/11, congressional representatives and senator all held hands and sang our second unofficial national anthem, "God Bless America." of course, it doesn't hurt that if the politican doesn't overdo it, he or she will get a bit of a boost riding on God's "coat tails."


Politics and the Military: Someone noted that Europeans look distrustful on generals getting into politics. Americans had a very good example in its first general, George Washington. After Washington had won the American revolution, all he wanted to do was to go back to his farm and his wife. He voluntarily gave up his command and went home. Europe was stunned. This was not the normal thing to do. Normally, the winning general would try to make himself king. Even King George III remarked on this. Later Napoleon lamanted regretfully from Elba where he ended his days, that the French had wanted him "to be a Washington." That was clearly impossible for him. Because of the highest respect Washington had in America, when the new constitution was written, everyone assumed he would be the first president. This help to insure that the constitution would be adopted by the states. The one thing that is required now is that there be absolute civilian control of the military. At no time does the president ever wear a military uniform or medals. This would be shocking. At all times he must wear civilian clothes. If he visits the troops and wears military fatiques, there are no signs of rank. We have had a number of very high ranking generals become president. The most notable are off course, Washington, Grant (victor in our civil war) and Eisenhower (supreme commander in WWII). We have been lucky that no general has ever seriously tried to take power, though some came close to the line such as McClellan (Civil War) and McArthur (WWII and Korean War). Both were fired.

Labor Day: We have our own Labor Day which is not May 1 but the first Monday of September. This also marks the end of summer. Next day the kid goes back to school. I think another day was picked because May 1 has sort of a socialist flavor to it, which is unacceptable in the U.S.

Government:The biggest different I can see in government is the fixed term of our congress and president as opposed to a parlimentary system in which a vote of no confidence can bring down the government. Each office has it own term, usually 2, 4 or 6 years. The country is stuck with the person for that time period, even if everyone hates the person. While this may seem not logical, it add a real sense of stability. When Lincoln was leading the country during our civil war, he was hugely unpopular. Many people, even his cabinet, were calling him the "Original Gorilla" because of ungainly bearing and supposed lack of intelligence. However, he held the nation together through the force of his will and saved the union. It is my understanding that when France was beaten by the Germans in WWII, the cabinet actually changed the goverment at the war's most crucial period, basically installing a traitor as the president. Instead of continuing the fight from North Africa, France surrendered. In the U.S, the cabinet implements the policies and decisions of the president. He can fire a cabinet member at will. It is my understanding of parlimentary procedures that the cabinet to a large degree makes the decisions and can essentially bring down the government if they do not agree with the Prime Minister.

I hope that some of my words were accurate and thought provoking. I would be pleased to hear other views. God bless America and Europe!
 
Very well written Tom Red, welcome to eupedia. I share similar points of view on US heritage.
Looking to more contributions of yours.
 
Welcome, Tom Red! Good, long post. Let me nitpick it. :wary2:

Americans are actually very conservative. I think this is a very important point in understanding our differences from Europeans. It is also often an overlooked point.

Really? It's always one of the first things I hear.

Many of the original settlers came to America to escape religious persecution. Those that came for other reasons were very lower class people, usually of the peasant class and naturally religious.

IMHO that's an oversimplification. Are you familiar with Fischer's work? Basically, it says that different migrations out of Britain (and, if we extend his theory, elsewhere) influenced the regional variations in America. Yes, many were religiously influenced, but not all of them were conservative, at least in the sense of "American conservatism." The legacy of the Puritans and Quakers, although they may have been "conservative" in a sense in their time, is a distinctly non-conservative regional political identity.

It is often forgotten that in spite of being the "New World," America has the oldest written Constitution and oldest political party in the world. This the mark of a conservative people, one whose government has been basically democratic for over 400 years.

Again, I view America as having more diversity in opinion. We are more conservative than Europe, and your points are valid to that end. But it's important to remember that liberalism has a long tradition in America; that when it was founded, America was one of the world's most liberal nations; and that a distinct liberal strain exists in Constitutional scholarship, whereby the Constitution is viewed as a "living" document. In fact, "American conservatism" is more properly understood as "Western conservative liberalism."

American are sincerely religious. It is not a forced thing and is the result of what I noted above, that Americans are basically a conservative people. Even less religious geographical areas still maintain a sense of religion.

I agree for the most part on your discussion of religion. The American version of "freedom of religion" encourages more enthusiastic religious practice than the European version, in my observation.
 
Tom Red, thanks for your feedback and welcome to the forum. I have a few remarks though.

Conservatism: Americans are actually very conservative. I think this is a very important point in understanding our differences from Europeans.

What exactly do you mean by conservative ? It can mean many different things to different people. The basic definition of conservatism is the rejection of change, but this can be seen in many respects. For example, a stance against change can mean being anti-immigration, anti-globalisation, anti-progress, anti-science, anti-free-market, anti-gay-rights, anti-technology, anti-cannabis... I don't think anybody can be all this at once (I hope). The Amish are very conservative in being anti-technology/progress, but they are a very small American minority. Fundamentalist Christian, known in politics as the neo-conservatives, are anti-science, but once again they are a minority (though more substantial). The French are seen as relatively conservative in Europe because a majority of them are anti-globalisation, anti-immigration and anti-cannabis. Americans may be conservative in many respects, but few are anti-globalisation and anti-free-market or downright anti-technology. Many Americans oppose the decriminalisation or legalisation of cannabis, and yet non-medical cannabis has been decriminalised in 13 states, and is on the way to full legalisation in California and Colorado, which will make these states more liberal in this regard than any European country (on a par with the Netherlands only, which is much smaller than either state). So I am not really satisfied when one says that a country of 310 million inhabitants (nearly a continent) is conservative. It just depends where and for what. In many respects Californians and New Yorkers are less conservative than most Europeans, and for the outside world America is first and foremost California and New York.


The American revolution of 1776 happened because Americans wanted to conserve their traditional governmental structure free from English interference.

That's not exactly correct. Before the independence, each of the 13 colonies had its own autonomous government, completely separate from the other 12 colonies, and often with quite different local cultures and religious affiliations too. The US independence brought these 13 disconnected entities together, and created for the first time a common government for all 13 colonies. Each colony, which had been until then de facto self-governing until then, apart from paying some taxes to London, had to surrender some of their precious autonomy to a new centralised government. This was actually quite a strong rupture with the past system.

It is often forgotten that in spite of being the "New World," America has the oldest written Constitution and oldest political party in the world.

This is a nice sign of patriotism, that shows that you have listened well to the US government propaganda diffused through the education system. Nevertheless it is completely wrong. The Romans first codified their constitution in 450 BCE. The Indians of the Maurya Empire in the 3rd century BCE. Most Germanic tribes that overran the Roman Empire codified their own written constitution too, like the Visigoths in 471, the Burgunds in 473, the Franks in 500, the Lombards in 643, etc. Japan wrote a seventeen-article constitution in 604. The Arabs wrote the Constitution of Medina around 622. there are dozens of other examples that precede the US Constitution by many centuries and often over a millennium. Among modern countries, the Netherlands got its first written constitution in 1579, San Marino in 1600, Ukraine (well, the Zaporozhians) in 1702 and Sweden in 1772 - all before the USA.

As for political parties, Roman obviously had them too, and so did most of Europe at least since the 17th century. In England, the Tory and Whig parties both emerged in 1679. Both still exist today (under the modern names of Conservatives and Liberal-Democrats), contrarily to the original parties of the USA (the Democratic Party was only founded in 1828 and the Republican Party in 1854).

This the mark of a conservative people, one whose government has been basically democratic for over 400 years.

You mean 230 years. Before the independence, colonies were not ruled particularly democratically. Big landlords had a lot more power than anybody else.

When European revolutions occured, they were a bitter tearing apart of the old and the new. There was a sense that religion had betrayed the people and that the upper classes had to be destroyed. It was a real struggle that had effects that lasted for decades if not centuries. Just look at the French and Russian revolutions. France went through how many republics and empires? Russia still has not recovered from its revolution.

Countries like Switzerland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden or even Britain have not suffered any revolution since the mid-17th century or earlier.
 
The French are seen as relatively conservative in Europe because a majority of them are anti-globalisation, anti-immigration and anti-cannabis.

I don't find that the French are anti-cannabis in particular considering that French people are among the heaviest consumers of cannabis in Europe.
Anti-immigration indeed, especially that coming from north Africa but don't forget that most of French citizen have a lots of European immigrant ancestry (Mostly Italian, Polish, Belgian, Spanish) including current French President.
Anti globalisation too although France level of economic openness is one of the highest in Europe.
 
Actually, the French left is strongly anti-globalisation but pro-Europe, pro-immigration and pro-cannabis. In fact, there is a wide spectrum within the French left, but as for their stance on globalisation, it is just to make sure they are on the opposite side of the far-right. The cleavage is more generational, as the youngsters tend to clash with their elders for the management of the country in the last decades. A recent poll shows that the elder see the youngers are not motivated, not focused even though they reckon the coming generation will see its life standards drop. France is also quite divided between city dwellers and the rural world, who have different priorities when it comes to politics. Unevitable for country that big...
 
When European revolutions occured, they were a bitter tearing apart of the old and the new. There was a sense that religion had betrayed the people and that the upper classes had to be destroyed. It was a real struggle that had effects that lasted for decades if not centuries. Just look at the French and Russian revolutions. France went through how many republics and empires? Russia still has not recovered from its revolution.

That's true. American revolution was less violent probably because it took place far from Continental Europe. As Napoleon once said, if the American revolution had occured in Europe, it wouldn't have last two years because all the big Monarchies and empire of Europe would have crush it like they did with France. It happened the same thing with the Russian revolution except that the foreign powers were mostly democratic this time. When the country where the Revolution takes place, the government in power starts to become paranoid against everything and everyone which lead to civil war.
 
I don't find that the French are anti-cannabis in particular considering that French people are among the heaviest consumers of cannabis in Europe.

Actually, the French left is strongly anti-globalisation but pro-Europe, pro-immigration and pro-cannabis.

It's one thing to say something but another to look at the facts. France has not yet decriminalised even tiny possessions of cannabis, and it still has some of the most repressive laws (worse than Texas !) against cannabis production, even for personal use, which is punishable by a maximum sentence of twenty years' imprisonment or a fine of up to 7.5 million € (see Article 222-35 of the French Penal Code).

Anti-immigration indeed, especially that coming from north Africa but don't forget that most of French citizen have a lots of European immigrant ancestry (Mostly Italian, Polish, Belgian, Spanish) including current French President..

You can only see immigration, from a legal point of view, as people coming from outside your borders. Since 1992 (not too recent I hope) the borders of France are effectively the EU's borders, as traffic within the EU (at least Schengen area) is completely open, visa-free and unrestricted. Therefore being anti-immigration can only mean against immigration from outside the EU (and other Schengen countries like Switzerland). However for most people "immigrant" means economic immigrants from the Third World. In any case the term immigrant never legally includes tourists, expats (temporary foreign workers) or diplomats, but people who come to settle permanently and, in many cases, seek naturalisation. Statistics about foreigners in a country rarely reflect the actual percentage of immigrants since many have been naturalised, and many nominal foreigners are in fact EU citizens or temporary expats.
 
Moreover USA were democratic only for whites, until 70's.
 
Moreover USA were democratic only for whites, until 70's.

That's right. If we consider universal suffrage as a definition of a modern democracy, then the USA was one of the last developed country to become one, in 1965 - after Lebanon, China, Ghana, Indonesia and many other developing countries. In Europe only Switzerland was later (1971) because the Swiss were reluctant to grant suffrage to women.

The US wasn't the first to grant women suffrage either. Many countries like Australia, Canada, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Ireland, Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Russia and so on came earlier.
 
That's right. If we consider universal suffrage as a definition of a modern democracy, then the USA was one of the last developed country to become one, in 1965 - after Lebanon, China, Ghana, Indonesia and many other developing countries. In Europe only Switzerland was later (1971) because the Swiss were reluctant to grant suffrage to women.

Not sure about others, but I wouldn't put China on the list. It was only a democratic republic (still is) on paper, in reality it is one party dictatorship. Let's judge by actions not words. I have a feeling that Ghana and Indonesia falls in same category.
 

This thread has been viewed 148031 times.

Back
Top