4 ms·

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

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?
    - maxerickson 8y ago
      This is literally expressed in some state laws, search "Castle Doctrine". Stand your ground laws are also somewhat related.
maxerickson 8y ago
And even the freedom to capture your regulator. It's kind of funny to say that free trade is antithetical to the EU when economic integration and lowering barriers to trade were among the primary motivations for it (it was preceded by various economic agreements).
- xstartup 8y ago
  It just depends on at what point you are in the economic game. If you've your bucket of wealth full. You'll against the free market, which can transfer your wealth to other nations. If you are a poor nation, you are more likely to try your luck after all what you can lose when you've nearly nothing. Or if you are confident in your companies' methods of extracting wealth from other nation, then you are more likely to favor free trade. Europe after imperialism was a bucket full of wealth and just wanted to shut off the door to prevent wealth from escaping. Today, Europe's population is aging fast, plus they do not allow immigration. They just can't compete today! Europe is in wealth preservation mode and American companies like Apple, Facebook, Google are superior at "value extraction". Europe no longer wants to play this game and signals by enacting unreasbly difficult to comply with laws like GDPR.
  - maxerickson 8y ago
    EU has quite some immigrants coming in from outside the union. I certainly wouldn't characterize it as 'do not allow immigration'. There's even reactionary right wing movements claiming that immigrants are going to make everything go to hell. You seem to have settled on economics as a zero sum game. Trade ministers in most countries haven't.
  - OscarCunningham 8y ago
    >You'll against the free market, which can transfer your wealth to other nations. That's not how trade works. It's beneficial to both parties.
    - xstartup 8y ago
      In an efficient free market sure. But not in practice. The biggest proponent of free trade, the US had been protectionist and only lifted trade barriers when its local industries got strong enough to compete globally.

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?
  - maxerickson 8y ago
    This is literally expressed in some state laws, search "Castle Doctrine". Stand your ground laws are also somewhat related.

maxerickson 8y ago

And even the freedom to capture your regulator. It's kind of funny to say that free trade is antithetical to the EU when economic integration and lowering barriers to trade were among the primary motivations for it (it was preceded by various economic agreements).

xstartup 8y ago
It just depends on at what point you are in the economic game. If you've your bucket of wealth full. You'll against the free market, which can transfer your wealth to other nations. If you are a poor nation, you are more likely to try your luck after all what you can lose when you've nearly nothing. Or if you are confident in your companies' methods of extracting wealth from other nation, then you are more likely to favor free trade. Europe after imperialism was a bucket full of wealth and just wanted to shut off the door to prevent wealth from escaping. Today, Europe's population is aging fast, plus they do not allow immigration. They just can't compete today! Europe is in wealth preservation mode and American companies like Apple, Facebook, Google are superior at "value extraction". Europe no longer wants to play this game and signals by enacting unreasbly difficult to comply with laws like GDPR.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  EU has quite some immigrants coming in from outside the union. I certainly wouldn't characterize it as 'do not allow immigration'. There's even reactionary right wing movements claiming that immigrants are going to make everything go to hell. You seem to have settled on economics as a zero sum game. Trade ministers in most countries haven't.
- OscarCunningham 8y ago
  >You'll against the free market, which can transfer your wealth to other nations. That's not how trade works. It's beneficial to both parties.
  - xstartup 8y ago
    In an efficient free market sure. But not in practice. The biggest proponent of free trade, the US had been protectionist and only lifted trade barriers when its local industries got strong enough to compete globally.