7 ms·

Ask HN: What is so different between EU and US govt?

I only have my own experience and understanding of the world to go by as evidence for this presumption, but I'll ask the question anyways: What is so different about EU vs US that the EU govt tends to lean toward protecting its citizens and US govt tends to lean toward protecting its corporations? EDIT: I'm mostly looking at this not to define the types of government in each region. I'm more looking at this from the human nature perspective. Why is one group of people more interested in protecting citizens and the other more interested in protecting corporations? Obviously neither government is exactly the same now as it was when it was started. How did one group of people evolve their government to be more interested in protecting people, and the other evolved to be more interested in protecting corporations?

abhiminator 8y ago
The United States is generally considered to be a free-market hegemony (and has been at the helm of the pecking order since the early 1900s), and the system was set-up (at least when it was originally conceived) in a manner so as to cause minimal Big Government interference in day-to-day affairs of the people and the states of the Union. Freedom is something folks in the United States take very seriously, and this includes freedom to trade and open-up businesses freely, with minimal regulation and taxation -- heck the American Revolution itself was triggered because of tiff over taxation, extending more broadly to tyranny. [0] Now, contemporary EU on the other hand has a vastly different and divergent history from that of the U.S. and Europeans, generally speaking, aren't as skeptical of their government as Americans are. Also, EU leans more to the left (generally speaking) relative to the United States, most "right-wing" parties in the EU would be considered to be slightly left-of-center if they were based in the U.S. [1] Now, with that out of the way, to address your question -- both places have vastly different history and the divergent histories has given birth to vastly different cultures, helped by the fact that they're separated by the second-biggest body of water on the planet, making it even harder for inter-culture interaction. Right-leaning countries, like the U.S. for example, generally advocate for more free trade, less regulation and less taxation which is directly antithetical to the core principles of left-leaning countries, like the EU-bloc for example. [2] [0] http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/rights.htm http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/rights.htm [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_s... [2] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/19/5-ways-americans-and-europeans-are-different/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/19/5-ways-ameri...
- perpetualcrayon 8y ago
  Thank you for the feedback. Interesting info. I definitely think my question was not as precise as I was looking for. I definitely get the "right leaning" vs "left leaning" dichotomy. I'm wondering more about the human nature element. What's so different about people in EU vs US that one would find more value in protecting citizens and the other would find more value in protecting corporations?
  - abhiminator 8y ago
    Generally speaking, Americans tend to prioritize individual liberty, while Europeans tend to value the role of the state to ensure no one in society is in need, and thus individual liberty by extension extends over to the property the individual owns, like businesses and corporations, for example. Europeans on the other hand are more 'collectivist' RELATIVE to the United States, which I assert might be due to the bad hangover from earlier empires; U.S. has been a pretty stable Democratic Republic for close to 250 years now.
    - avmich 8y ago
      Do the individual liberties in US exist as approximately "freedom from government" or also "freedom from fellow citizens"? Same for EU - does EU "collectivism" work to ensure citizens are well in all aspects, freedom included?
      - sheepmullet 8y ago
        I find it's more about fundamental individual freedoms in the US vs statistical best outcomes in the EU. If removing the right to self defence makes Europeans statistically 10% safer then it's a good move and damn the people who are left defenceless. Likewise in the US it's thought to be better to have the right to defend yourself even if that makes society overall a bit more dangerous.
    - perpetualcrayon 8y ago
      Maybe it's the wrong thing to get from this, but I'm imagining that in this scenario, in the US, one man's property is in most cases more valuable than another man's existence?
xstartup 8y ago
If you want to truly understand the difference. You'll have to travel far back in history. America did not exist yet and Europe was a poor place. India and China were rich and had a huge trade surplus, they were getting richer and Europe was getting poorer. And they were not interested in invading other countries. Europeans invaded and robbed India and Africa from where they got most of their wealth. This wealth helped Europe industrialize. During this time someone looking to travel to India accidentally discovered America. I'll leave rest on you to research. Fast forward today, American companies (facebook, google) have succeeded in extracting huge value from the European continent. Partly due to their economic policies and immigration of talented labor from other countries. Europeans do not welcome immigration, considering the fact they are the nations who've robbed developing nations. And Europeans do not like it because they've rapidly aging population, they are not in a position to compete with America and rising nations (India/China etc...) Europe is now in wealth preservation mode. They want to stop wealth from leaving their shores. As Europeans come together to protect the wealth and they've somehow made a case for the welfare state. Today, Europeans ride their moral high horse and advocate for high standards, but why should anyone give them any creditability when their roots are imperialism / plundering poor nations. GDPR is yet another unreasonable and difficult to comply with policy coming out of Europe. It's their wealth preservation plan.
- xstartup 8y ago
  As a European, it might hurt your feelings but you should blame it on your ancestors. Europeans have never been apologetic towards the nations they've robbed during Imperiasic Era. Until they correct their mistake. Only nation who we should trust the ones who have never robbed other nations. I would love to know how Europeans can defend their actions of past.
  - olivierduval 8y ago
    Quite funny: you're more describing the US than Europe. Maybe because you're only interested by US and not by Europe..? ;-)
    - 8y ago
BartBoch 8y ago
I think it goes like that: -US government is a capitalist one semi-controlled by corporations (corporations control the funds, but the public is the one to vote - thanks to a duopoly, the latter have limited options and the former decides which one to support). -EU "government" is a social one semi-controlled by social organizations (basically a lobbying body, mostly socialist that can create a short-term momentum to push their agendas. The main power that matter is Germany, but there is a possibility for a coalition of a mixed majority of other top 6 countries to outweigh their decisions both vote-wise and politically).
mars4rp 8y ago
The US has a president, most EU countries don't have most of the power concentrated in one person! as a side effect, US presidency is winner take all, that forces 2 party system. parliamentary systems don't have that side effect. Add money contribution system of US to the mix and voila you are going to get the same system no matter where on earth it is located!
mindcrash 8y ago
The United States is a representative republic (e.g. voters get to choose whoever represents them in the House and Senate, their local governments and their President) while the EU as it is today can be best described as a Oligarchy. Let me explain. Citizens in the EU can only vote for the European Parlement (EP) which takes place every five years. However, the European Parlement only exists to make it look like citizens have any influence in European politics which is not the case. The true power of European politics lies within the European Commission (EC) which is NOT elected by the people but are politicians within the EU chosen by politicians within the EU. The EC doubles as both the executive and legislative branch of the EU. However, Citizens within the EU have no influence on execution or legislation by the EC whatsoever (they would like to pretend that the people do have this influence, because the pretence of "democracy"). Many HN members residing in the US are currently quite angry that they have Donald Trump as their president. But actually they have to be glad, because in about four years his first term has ended and you, as citizens of the US, at least have the ability to choose a better president (if the majority agrees, ofcourse). In Europe, unless European law and government will be seriously reformed, we will never have that opportunity. We are stuck with a unchosen and thus undemocratic legislative and executive branch who have total control over the democratically chosen local leaders and governments. Still think the EU is so awesome? I hope you will reconsider. PS: Source being me, I live in the EU and know pretty much all you would ever need to know about local and European politics around these parts.
BjoernKW 8y ago
I don't think that such a clear-cut distinction based on motivation or general intent can be made. There are political factions in the US whose goals are quite similar to those of more left-leaning factions in the EU. In general, you could probably say that the EU is more left-leaning than the US because two of its major powers - France and Germany - tend to be more left-leaning as well as Scandinavian countries, which from a US perspective are sometimes considered almost socialist (though that's not exactly true). While more left-leaning factions in general seem to favour the rights of the average citizen over those of corporations this isn't unanimously good or a clear distinction either. In some ways, the EU is a good example of the road to hell that's paved with good intentions. Its regulations often are so complex that - intentionally or not - they favour big corporations because they're too difficult to implement for smaller companies. Being an entrepreneur for instance is - very broadly speaking - more difficult and unusual than in the US, simply because employment in a big corporation pretty much is the assumed default model in the EU. Anything that deviates from that is more difficult to accommodate in the existing legal framework.

abhiminator 8y ago

The United States is generally considered to be a free-market hegemony (and has been at the helm of the pecking order since the early 1900s), and the system was set-up (at least when it was originally conceived) in a manner so as to cause minimal Big Government interference in day-to-day affairs of the people and the states of the Union. Freedom is something folks in the United States take very seriously, and this includes freedom to trade and open-up businesses freely, with minimal regulation and taxation -- heck the American Revolution itself was triggered because of tiff over taxation, extending more broadly to tyranny. [0] Now, contemporary EU on the other hand has a vastly different and divergent history from that of the U.S. and Europeans, generally speaking, aren't as skeptical of their government as Americans are. Also, EU leans more to the left (generally speaking) relative to the United States, most "right-wing" parties in the EU would be considered to be slightly left-of-center if they were based in the U.S. [1] Now, with that out of the way, to address your question -- both places have vastly different history and the divergent histories has given birth to vastly different cultures, helped by the fact that they're separated by the second-biggest body of water on the planet, making it even harder for inter-culture interaction. Right-leaning countries, like the U.S. for example, generally advocate for more free trade, less regulation and less taxation which is directly antithetical to the core principles of left-leaning countries, like the EU-bloc for example. [2] [0] http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/rights.htm http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/rights.htm [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_s... [2] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/19/5-ways-americans-and-europeans-are-different/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/19/5-ways-ameri...

perpetualcrayon 8y ago
Thank you for the feedback. Interesting info. I definitely think my question was not as precise as I was looking for. I definitely get the "right leaning" vs "left leaning" dichotomy. I'm wondering more about the human nature element. What's so different about people in EU vs US that one would find more value in protecting citizens and the other would find more value in protecting corporations?
- abhiminator 8y ago
  Generally speaking, Americans tend to prioritize individual liberty, while Europeans tend to value the role of the state to ensure no one in society is in need, and thus individual liberty by extension extends over to the property the individual owns, like businesses and corporations, for example. Europeans on the other hand are more 'collectivist' RELATIVE to the United States, which I assert might be due to the bad hangover from earlier empires; U.S. has been a pretty stable Democratic Republic for close to 250 years now.
  - avmich 8y ago
    Do the individual liberties in US exist as approximately "freedom from government" or also "freedom from fellow citizens"? Same for EU - does EU "collectivism" work to ensure citizens are well in all aspects, freedom included?
    - sheepmullet 8y ago
      I find it's more about fundamental individual freedoms in the US vs statistical best outcomes in the EU. If removing the right to self defence makes Europeans statistically 10% safer then it's a good move and damn the people who are left defenceless. Likewise in the US it's thought to be better to have the right to defend yourself even if that makes society overall a bit more dangerous.
  - perpetualcrayon 8y ago
    Maybe it's the wrong thing to get from this, but I'm imagining that in this scenario, in the US, one man's property is in most cases more valuable than another man's existence?

xstartup 8y ago

If you want to truly understand the difference. You'll have to travel far back in history. America did not exist yet and Europe was a poor place. India and China were rich and had a huge trade surplus, they were getting richer and Europe was getting poorer. And they were not interested in invading other countries. Europeans invaded and robbed India and Africa from where they got most of their wealth. This wealth helped Europe industrialize. During this time someone looking to travel to India accidentally discovered America. I'll leave rest on you to research. Fast forward today, American companies (facebook, google) have succeeded in extracting huge value from the European continent. Partly due to their economic policies and immigration of talented labor from other countries. Europeans do not welcome immigration, considering the fact they are the nations who've robbed developing nations. And Europeans do not like it because they've rapidly aging population, they are not in a position to compete with America and rising nations (India/China etc...) Europe is now in wealth preservation mode. They want to stop wealth from leaving their shores. As Europeans come together to protect the wealth and they've somehow made a case for the welfare state. Today, Europeans ride their moral high horse and advocate for high standards, but why should anyone give them any creditability when their roots are imperialism / plundering poor nations. GDPR is yet another unreasonable and difficult to comply with policy coming out of Europe. It's their wealth preservation plan.

xstartup 8y ago
As a European, it might hurt your feelings but you should blame it on your ancestors. Europeans have never been apologetic towards the nations they've robbed during Imperiasic Era. Until they correct their mistake. Only nation who we should trust the ones who have never robbed other nations. I would love to know how Europeans can defend their actions of past.
- olivierduval 8y ago
  Quite funny: you're more describing the US than Europe. Maybe because you're only interested by US and not by Europe..? ;-)
  - 8y ago

BartBoch 8y ago

I think it goes like that: -US government is a capitalist one semi-controlled by corporations (corporations control the funds, but the public is the one to vote - thanks to a duopoly, the latter have limited options and the former decides which one to support). -EU "government" is a social one semi-controlled by social organizations (basically a lobbying body, mostly socialist that can create a short-term momentum to push their agendas. The main power that matter is Germany, but there is a possibility for a coalition of a mixed majority of other top 6 countries to outweigh their decisions both vote-wise and politically).

mars4rp 8y ago

The US has a president, most EU countries don't have most of the power concentrated in one person! as a side effect, US presidency is winner take all, that forces 2 party system. parliamentary systems don't have that side effect. Add money contribution system of US to the mix and voila you are going to get the same system no matter where on earth it is located!

mindcrash 8y ago

The United States is a representative republic (e.g. voters get to choose whoever represents them in the House and Senate, their local governments and their President) while the EU as it is today can be best described as a Oligarchy. Let me explain. Citizens in the EU can only vote for the European Parlement (EP) which takes place every five years. However, the European Parlement only exists to make it look like citizens have any influence in European politics which is not the case. The true power of European politics lies within the European Commission (EC) which is NOT elected by the people but are politicians within the EU chosen by politicians within the EU. The EC doubles as both the executive and legislative branch of the EU. However, Citizens within the EU have no influence on execution or legislation by the EC whatsoever (they would like to pretend that the people do have this influence, because the pretence of "democracy"). Many HN members residing in the US are currently quite angry that they have Donald Trump as their president. But actually they have to be glad, because in about four years his first term has ended and you, as citizens of the US, at least have the ability to choose a better president (if the majority agrees, ofcourse). In Europe, unless European law and government will be seriously reformed, we will never have that opportunity. We are stuck with a unchosen and thus undemocratic legislative and executive branch who have total control over the democratically chosen local leaders and governments. Still think the EU is so awesome? I hope you will reconsider. PS: Source being me, I live in the EU and know pretty much all you would ever need to know about local and European politics around these parts.

BjoernKW 8y ago

I don't think that such a clear-cut distinction based on motivation or general intent can be made. There are political factions in the US whose goals are quite similar to those of more left-leaning factions in the EU. In general, you could probably say that the EU is more left-leaning than the US because two of its major powers - France and Germany - tend to be more left-leaning as well as Scandinavian countries, which from a US perspective are sometimes considered almost socialist (though that's not exactly true). While more left-leaning factions in general seem to favour the rights of the average citizen over those of corporations this isn't unanimously good or a clear distinction either. In some ways, the EU is a good example of the road to hell that's paved with good intentions. Its regulations often are so complex that - intentionally or not - they favour big corporations because they're too difficult to implement for smaller companies. Being an entrepreneur for instance is - very broadly speaking - more difficult and unusual than in the US, simply because employment in a big corporation pretty much is the assumed default model in the EU. Anything that deviates from that is more difficult to accommodate in the existing legal framework.