4 ms·

I’m a Canadian who came to the US for grad school in 2005. The lack of a (British) sense of Duty in the US is one of the most striking differences I noticed wh

by leot 6y ago

I’m a Canadian who came to the US for grad school in 2005. The lack of a (British) sense of Duty in the US is one of the most striking differences I noticed when arriving here. I suspect it’s in part a result of the frontier mentality: “I got mine you go get yours”. This went obsolete almost as soon as the West was Won, yet remains as a somewhat pathological vestige.

nescioquid 6y ago
Duty would imply a relationship of mutual obligations between the citizen and the state. Thatcherite neoliberalism found an acolyte in Reagan, and ever since in this country, "government is the problem, not the solution". Under such a regime where the state seems to have no real obligations to its citizens, talk of duty seems rather precious.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  Duty is not necessarily to the state; it can be to society as well. In fact, there's a large fraction of neoliberals who would argue that individuals following their duty to society should displace the state in many areas.
  - claudeganon 6y ago
    > Duty is not necessarily to the state; it can be to society Thatcher is also famous for having said “there is no such thing as society.” Some people who adhere to neoliberal ideology might behave as you say, but in practice it seems little more than excuse for the selfish, cutthroat chaos that has left the US and U.K. so poorly off today.
pueblito 6y ago
I’m an American and I fail to understand what duty I am failing to meet? I pay my taxes, obey the laws, treat others with respect and honor my ancestors - as do nearly every single person I know. What duty am I missing? Have not millions of Americans served their country already?
- curryst 6y ago
  I'm American as well; those things don't count as a duty, they're just things you legally have to do. Duty is beyond the things you have to do without being thrown in jail. Many military people do feel a sense of duty, and that's why they serve or served. In a civilian sense, duty would be things like acknowledging that a park is a shared space. If you walk past a piece of garbage and don't pick it up, you have failed in your duty to maintain the shared space even if you aren't the one that dropped it. A contemporary one would be cutting down on CO2 emissions. It's everyone's duty to cut back on that; someone who bought a Hummer would be shamed, as would people who keep their thermostats super high or low. Gossip spreads that you're a clod who's damaging the environment we all share, and you get shamed. People used to patch potholes in public roads near their house because they felt a duty to keep the neighborhood nice. These things don't happen anymore. I'm not sure whether that's a good or bad thing, since there were certainly downsides to duty. I don't even know if it's legal to patch potholes in public roads anymore.
  - pbourke 6y ago
    You have precisely nailed it. Following the rules (when there is no hard penalty for breaking them) and being community-oriented (beyond your own family/church/social circle) are a necessary but not sufficient part of duty. As another Canadian in the US, I have noticed this difference as well. I have also regrettably noticed Canada becoming more like the US in this regard as time goes on.
    - throwaway201103 6y ago
      There seems to be a line somewhere between doing one's duty, and enabling other's bad behavior, based on the examples given. E.g. why am I enabling the city's negligence in keeping the park clean or the potholes filled by doing these things myself, when I already pay taxes ostensibly to pay other people to do these things.
      - pdonis 6y ago
        Part of it is probably just the cost of doing one's "duty". Picking up a piece of litter and throwing it in a nearby trash can is a very low cost thing to do, so even if technically the city is supposed to have someone picking up the trash in a public park, an individual who sees some litter can still clean it up with minimal effort. Filling potholes, OTOH, is a much higher cost thing to do, and so people are more likely to feel that the city should be using the money they have already paid in taxes to do it. (Another aspect is probably also legal risk--if I decide to fill a pothole and do it wrong and someone suffers damage to their car, I might get sued. The city has many ways of mitigating that risk that I, as an individual, do not.)
marcus_holmes 6y ago
Patton definitely got it: "Patton urged his soldiers to do their duty regardless of personal fear" [0] There are other quotes from US authors that show they understood this concept as well. Though how ingrained it was in general American society, I don't know. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton%27s_speech_to_the_Third_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton%27s_speech_to...
aidenn0 6y ago
I can speak for the western 2/3 of the US, but east of the Mississipi, I think the idea of duty went out-of-fasion in the period from ~1965-75. The combination of Vietnam and the civil rights movement obviously led to a distrust of authority, but in also a broader sense a distrust in society as a whole. Social cohesion is supported by duty, but also a requirement for duty; as that fell apart, Duty went with it. In addition, less cosmopolitan areas were less affected by all of the above, which allowed Duty to persist there longer. That was, ironically, the final nail in the coffin for Duty because Duty became déclassé and the mark of a rube.

by leot 6y ago

nescioquid 6y ago

Duty would imply a relationship of mutual obligations between the citizen and the state. Thatcherite neoliberalism found an acolyte in Reagan, and ever since in this country, "government is the problem, not the solution". Under such a regime where the state seems to have no real obligations to its citizens, talk of duty seems rather precious.

aidenn0 6y ago
Duty is not necessarily to the state; it can be to society as well. In fact, there's a large fraction of neoliberals who would argue that individuals following their duty to society should displace the state in many areas.
- claudeganon 6y ago
  > Duty is not necessarily to the state; it can be to society Thatcher is also famous for having said “there is no such thing as society.” Some people who adhere to neoliberal ideology might behave as you say, but in practice it seems little more than excuse for the selfish, cutthroat chaos that has left the US and U.K. so poorly off today.

pueblito 6y ago

I’m an American and I fail to understand what duty I am failing to meet? I pay my taxes, obey the laws, treat others with respect and honor my ancestors - as do nearly every single person I know. What duty am I missing? Have not millions of Americans served their country already?

curryst 6y ago
I'm American as well; those things don't count as a duty, they're just things you legally have to do. Duty is beyond the things you have to do without being thrown in jail. Many military people do feel a sense of duty, and that's why they serve or served. In a civilian sense, duty would be things like acknowledging that a park is a shared space. If you walk past a piece of garbage and don't pick it up, you have failed in your duty to maintain the shared space even if you aren't the one that dropped it. A contemporary one would be cutting down on CO2 emissions. It's everyone's duty to cut back on that; someone who bought a Hummer would be shamed, as would people who keep their thermostats super high or low. Gossip spreads that you're a clod who's damaging the environment we all share, and you get shamed. People used to patch potholes in public roads near their house because they felt a duty to keep the neighborhood nice. These things don't happen anymore. I'm not sure whether that's a good or bad thing, since there were certainly downsides to duty. I don't even know if it's legal to patch potholes in public roads anymore.
- pbourke 6y ago
  You have precisely nailed it. Following the rules (when there is no hard penalty for breaking them) and being community-oriented (beyond your own family/church/social circle) are a necessary but not sufficient part of duty. As another Canadian in the US, I have noticed this difference as well. I have also regrettably noticed Canada becoming more like the US in this regard as time goes on.
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    There seems to be a line somewhere between doing one's duty, and enabling other's bad behavior, based on the examples given. E.g. why am I enabling the city's negligence in keeping the park clean or the potholes filled by doing these things myself, when I already pay taxes ostensibly to pay other people to do these things.
    - pdonis 6y ago
      Part of it is probably just the cost of doing one's "duty". Picking up a piece of litter and throwing it in a nearby trash can is a very low cost thing to do, so even if technically the city is supposed to have someone picking up the trash in a public park, an individual who sees some litter can still clean it up with minimal effort. Filling potholes, OTOH, is a much higher cost thing to do, and so people are more likely to feel that the city should be using the money they have already paid in taxes to do it. (Another aspect is probably also legal risk--if I decide to fill a pothole and do it wrong and someone suffers damage to their car, I might get sued. The city has many ways of mitigating that risk that I, as an individual, do not.)

marcus_holmes 6y ago

Patton definitely got it: "Patton urged his soldiers to do their duty regardless of personal fear" [0] There are other quotes from US authors that show they understood this concept as well. Though how ingrained it was in general American society, I don't know. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton%27s_speech_to_the_Third_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton%27s_speech_to...

aidenn0 6y ago

I can speak for the western 2/3 of the US, but east of the Mississipi, I think the idea of duty went out-of-fasion in the period from ~1965-75. The combination of Vietnam and the civil rights movement obviously led to a distrust of authority, but in also a broader sense a distrust in society as a whole. Social cohesion is supported by duty, but also a requirement for duty; as that fell apart, Duty went with it. In addition, less cosmopolitan areas were less affected by all of the above, which allowed Duty to persist there longer. That was, ironically, the final nail in the coffin for Duty because Duty became déclassé and the mark of a rube.