American and European mentalities
Dr. George Voskopoulos
July 02, 2006
American policy in Iraq and the wider grand strategy of President Bush have caused unrest in Europe triggering a discussion on the alternative, if not contending, views of the world the two strategic allies have.
The Cold War assumptions suggest that American and European interests are identical and compatible. Yet, a number of findings suggest that America and Europe scrutinize the world through different prisms and set different priorities and policies.
In essence what makes them dissimilar is not just an issue of different foreign policies but also of dissimilar models of prioritizing, formulating attitudes as well as a number of practices on an individual and collective framework. This is not negative by definition nor should we expect America and Europe to behave as clones of a single-dimensional, positivist cultural and political milieu.
In September 2005 the Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies organized a Summer School in Romania looking into “the evolution of mentalities in Eastern Europe and the future of the European project”. The findings of the reports are useful to both Americans and Europeans in order not just to realize their differences, but above all their ability to enhance and map, through understanding, the accommodating capacity of their views of the world. They allow us to study ourselves by looking into the image we project outside our world and the expectations of our allies and partners.
According to the report Americans are more open to new ideas and have a winning mentality, while Europeans are more traditionalists and regarded as better losers.
The next issue bears great significance as Americans are portrayed as “conservative and religious fundamentalists”. Undeniably President Bush’s policy added to this negative notion supported by many in Europe. By contrast Europeans are considered “more secular but emphasizing traditions”.
In terms of perceived attitudes Americans emphasize the importance of equal opportunities, while Europeans tend to regard equal treatment as more important. To the same direction points the priority Americans give on freedom first and equality second, which is exactly the other way around in Europe.
The next field suggests that Europeans are more environmentally aware than Americans, who put emphasis on production and productivity. Moreover, according to the report America disposes a more compact corporate culture, is “obsessed with size”, while Europeans emphasize “family values” and suggest that “small is beautiful and ecological”.
The above factors of comparative analysis were related to “potentially objective indicators” such as “the intensity of associative life, economic efficiency within and outside the continent and the quality of life”. The report is not only indicative of divergent attitudes between Americans and Europeans but also point out the differences between two collectivities, which, although they are culturally-related and share a number of common values, they formulate their priorities within a contending social, political and even economic milieu. It could provide a causational approach framework on a number of contending issues such as the Kyoto Protocol, labor regulation, the welfare state, social cohesion and visions of the international political arena.
The Cold War assumptions suggest that American and European interests are identical and compatible. Yet, a number of findings suggest that America and Europe scrutinize the world through different prisms and set different priorities and policies.
In essence what makes them dissimilar is not just an issue of different foreign policies but also of dissimilar models of prioritizing, formulating attitudes as well as a number of practices on an individual and collective framework. This is not negative by definition nor should we expect America and Europe to behave as clones of a single-dimensional, positivist cultural and political milieu.
In September 2005 the Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies organized a Summer School in Romania looking into “the evolution of mentalities in Eastern Europe and the future of the European project”. The findings of the reports are useful to both Americans and Europeans in order not just to realize their differences, but above all their ability to enhance and map, through understanding, the accommodating capacity of their views of the world. They allow us to study ourselves by looking into the image we project outside our world and the expectations of our allies and partners.
According to the report Americans are more open to new ideas and have a winning mentality, while Europeans are more traditionalists and regarded as better losers.
The next issue bears great significance as Americans are portrayed as “conservative and religious fundamentalists”. Undeniably President Bush’s policy added to this negative notion supported by many in Europe. By contrast Europeans are considered “more secular but emphasizing traditions”.
In terms of perceived attitudes Americans emphasize the importance of equal opportunities, while Europeans tend to regard equal treatment as more important. To the same direction points the priority Americans give on freedom first and equality second, which is exactly the other way around in Europe.
The next field suggests that Europeans are more environmentally aware than Americans, who put emphasis on production and productivity. Moreover, according to the report America disposes a more compact corporate culture, is “obsessed with size”, while Europeans emphasize “family values” and suggest that “small is beautiful and ecological”.
The above factors of comparative analysis were related to “potentially objective indicators” such as “the intensity of associative life, economic efficiency within and outside the continent and the quality of life”. The report is not only indicative of divergent attitudes between Americans and Europeans but also point out the differences between two collectivities, which, although they are culturally-related and share a number of common values, they formulate their priorities within a contending social, political and even economic milieu. It could provide a causational approach framework on a number of contending issues such as the Kyoto Protocol, labor regulation, the welfare state, social cohesion and visions of the international political arena.
Print
Email
