Do American and European values differ?

Nearly four out of five Europeans asked in one poll said they thought Americans and Europeans have different values. Almost as many Americans agreed. But the Inglehart Values Map (see p.257 of Free World) shows a much more complex picture. Do you think we have different values? If so, what’s the biggest difference?

Debate - Page 7/13

Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Rich Howard, United Kingdom

Americans have to pledge allegiance to the flag everyday in school. This is the main difference between America and Europe - Americans have blind faith in their administration due to this ingenius propaganda exercise while Europeans question their beliefs due to state education. It seems that the American administration is very controlling and untrusting of their nationals so much so that they ban the publication of books and do anything they can to ensure that people do not question it's authority. It seems to be the complete opposite in Europe.
The American dream of being a millionaire actor in Hollywood is very different to the social conscience apparent within the fabric of European society, exampled in the forward thinking attitudes to recycling from some member states. These are stark differences which are apparent and widespread and seem to sum up the difference between American and Europe - Europeans think about others, Americans think about themselves. This is a sentiment prominent in all of the Bush administration's policies.

Ross Gurung, France

Temptation is very high amongst some duds to propagate smear campaign against in general the EU and in particular France which is one of the major actors of this mainstream of human achievement, i.e.; the European Union.
In this vast complex, some of them hazard a guess out of little hazy knowledge and try to create sensational event out of nothing. Somebody pays them to create 'spin' against France. I can easily name some of them such as Stryker McGuire and Eric Pope, two stooges of procons and assertive Nationalists who hide themselves behind the curtain of Reporters (Newsweek). Shame on them, they never learned to be a think tank. Instead, they scribble down their hates and spread misunderstandings between especially France and the USA as their masters trained them to do so. Poor little runts! It makes us to retch!!
Effectively I shall try to abridge the long Mediterranean history in order to thwart the cliché of eventual invasion of France by Arabs. If we consult the recent history, what we find is: a Governor of Tanger crossed the border (711 AD) and settled down in the South of Spain. Shortly after some years, a Caliph of Damascus fled the present Syria, as he was dethroned, headed straight to Cordu in Spain. As a result of which, some years later, Cordu became a great Muslim Cultural Centre with an University and all other facilities for Research and so on., where even the scholars of Christian European Countries such as Germany and Sweden to cite, came to learn Geometry and Architecture. Further, the Turks and Arabs as a whole, tried to expand their domination by invading France but Charles Martel defeated their coalition severely at Poitier in 732. Thereafter, the Christians of Spain pushed them back to the South of Spain. They occupied Grenada for about 1000 years. When Isabel of Castile and her husband Ferdinand of Aragon (the same who sent Columbus to discover India but, by chance, he discovered the present USA in1492) came to power, things started changing swiftly. All Christian Kings gathered their armies to change the fate of Spain. Therefore, why there were sporadic but determining battles against the Turks and the Maurs. If we believe Cervantes his famous Don Quichote was written (1605) with the backdrop of the battle of Christians of North Spain against the Turks (1571). The aftermath was most of the Turks were thrown into the sea and the remaining ones were compelled to change their religion if they longed to live there. So why, today some of the descendants of those Turks now Spanish in every aspect, fervently argue in favour of Turkey to be in the EU.
At the same time, let us not forget the Ottomans alias Turks. Ultimately, the Balkan countries expelled them definitely (1683).
Furthermore, when Napoleon 1st. invaded Egypt (1798-1801) he was so much impressed by its advanced past civilization dating back to 3,000 years BC that he brought with him some of the masterpieces of the finest monuments. Nowadays, Louvre in Paris exposes them for the pleasure of the visitors. The Obelisk of 'Place de la Concorde' located at the next end of Champs Elysée is just eye catching. France offered the other twin obelisk to the USA in token of everlasting friendship between the two countries. Let us not forget another famous present of France named as the Statue of Liberty. The same Obelisk now stands boldly just near by the White House in Washington, the capital.
When France colonized Algeria (1830), Tunisia and Morocco, as she had the governance of a King named as Louis Philippe, they behaved cruelly in the treatment of local administration. Later on, France and England colonized all African continents from the west and the east respectively, until 1962 when De Gaulle released them from the French stronghold.
At the time of WWII, many Africans including Algerian and Moroccan Spahis took part in the delivery of France from the Nazi's grip. Many of them gave their lives for France. Thousands of them were buried near Strasburg in Alsace (east of France). To comprise the searing cause and effect, resulting in the long overdue awareness amongst our American friends, they are worried about the increasing number of Muslims in the EU including England where millions of Pakistanis, Nigerians etc. precipitated to have their parts in the riches of the past colonists. Germany badly needed extra arms to rebuild new Germany right from the scratch after the disaster of the WWII. They simply asked the Turks to come to Germany and help them erect the houses and the factories. Now one can count them in millions. There are as yet long years to pass (at least 20 years) if Turkey would meet the criteria to join or not to join the EU. At present, there is incompatibility of social behaviours, which are exactly on the antipodes. I dare say, it needs rash impulse to make them match.
Of course, France is extremely aware of the increasing Muslim population. Therefore, why some concrete measures are already underway to diminish the number of them by scattering them all over the territory thus avoiding them to concentrate in a compact community like in England. Another country, another solution is applied. In France whom so ever tries to create a subversive group is immediately punished by law. Only the trained French born Imams can deliver the conferences in the Mosques. Not to forget the Muslim territories (DOM-TOM) such as Comoro and Mayetta in the Indian Ocean.
Slogans such as 'Liberty, Equality and Fraternity' of French flag as well as the French Official Institutions bemuse and irritate our American friends. Albeit, for other overseas if the Americans become out of themselves and impatient it is to get distinguished in their hierarchical class system, it is nothing more than a childish crush course, where a hunk of dollars in the Banks determines their ranks and places in the Society. So why, more and more isolated Fortresses with strict security measures are built here and there all over the country.
In France, Zinedine Zidane, a soccer player who is Kabil by his origin (Algeria), won with his team the World Soccer Cup in 1998. In addition, in monthly poll, he is always placed at the 1st. rank in France. Couscous of North Africa is much appreciated culinary dishes in France. All Tunisians, Algerians and Moroccans see the French TV everyday. Now France has become sort of a melting pot of many nationalities as it was New York of late.
In light of all that, everyone can notice that there is no facial racism in France. Except, sometimes the incidents of Anti-Semitism of the Arab origin youths and sympathisers of Palestine when they see on TV outburst of violence and the misfortune of their fellow beings because of Sharon's inflexible politics. To confirm my say one can ask the black Americans and their fruitful episodes as Jazz men in late fifties, sixties, seventies and so on. One who is under the banner of the Republic and one who abides by the rules and regulations as well as the strict secular objectives of it, thanks to the law of 1905 which clearly separates the Church and the Republic after ages of domination and abuses by the Religious potentials, he or she is taken as one of the wards of the Republic, no matter what country and race he or she hails from.
In concert, the Sultan of Brunei as well as the Princes of the Middle East are the owners of many Hotel Palaces. What about the deposit of 50 Milliard $ in the American and the English Banks? If it occurs, all of a sudden, they have the crooked idea to retire their cash holdings and assets, the Crash of 1929 would be just an ordinary incident compared to the life to come. So why, empty mind is devil's workshop. Let devil stay confined to the Magic Box or say Pandora's Box. Pandora the first woman of the humanity after the Greek mythology, of course everybody knows this legend, that she let escape all sins and vices except hope. How far it is true or not everybody is entitled to experience them in everyday life.
P.S.: Please read the best seller, "The European Dream" by Jeremy Rifkin, an eminent but controversial US author and University lecturer, if you are in favour of the EU.

Michel Bastian, France

To Emilio Fernandez Castro
> Maybe you're right. Maybe the average American doesn't feel the necessity of knowing anything about another cultures or another countries. But I don't think it is a fault, a specific fault, of the Americans.
I didn´t say that. Concentrating on our own daily lives and not looking right or left is a trait common to all humanity. But at the moment, the americans are in a position where they need not bother with foreign languages or cultures in their daily lives very often. One exception: the southern US border and areas with a heavy latino population. Due to heavy immigration, lots of americans start getting more information on Mexico and latino culture. Case in point: go to the website of any politician in these states, and you´ll find that most of them have a spanish mirror site nowadays. That´s because mexican culture, language and politics is something that concerns them personally, not just on tv news shows.
> I'm convinced it is a question of power. <...> That's why I'm very concerned about that "mutual ignorance" and I believe that we have to fight against it. It is a question of mutual survival.
Can´t say I disagree with you on that. That´s my argument: when you learn about a foreign country, you´re less prone to nurse idiotic prejudices against it. The only problem at the moment is that there´s a rift between America and Europe, and that rift, I´m sorry to say, has not been created by the europeans. It´s pretty difficult to close that rift if the american administration institutes measures against every european state that doesn´t agree with it. If you want an example: how can a european high school student from Germany learn about the US if the foreign exchange program he was in was cancelled by the US authorities because of the stance Germany took against the Iraq war?
Also, there are plenty of americans (not all of them fortunately) who, like Phil, just aren´t interested in learning about us, our language and our culture, let alone visit and have a look for themselves, the rationale being that they don´t need to because we´re supposedly "unimportant", obnoxious (i.e. we dare criticise the US) and generally not worth the effort? We can´t change this attitude. Only the americans can. That said, we should make sure to keep the dialogue open for those americans that actually want to broaden their horizon. And we should make sure to fight european ignorance about the US. But that´s about all we can do.

Michel Bastian, France

To Ron Walker:
> First, it needs to be understood that neither Europe nor the USA are monolithic cultures, each composed of identically-thinking clones.
Amen to that, Mr. Walker.
> There's a wide range of views on each side of the Atlantic. That range is one of Europe's biggest problems: varying cultures disagree on essential items like political corruption, or the universal application and enforcement of laws, making a practicable common legal framework difficult, (bordering on impossible.) But, with that proviso made, it can be seen that there are genuine differences about things like where the "common ground" that divides left from right can be found.
Indeed. There is no real "left" in the US (unless you want to describe the most liberal members of the democrats as being "left", which I´m sure they´d object to, at least until after the next election ;-)).
> There's also a considerable difference in the perception of reality. The American "common ground" is considerably to the right of that in most European countries.
Again, a very keen observation. The mere fact that the word "liberal" has degenerated into an insult in american political rethoric bears witness to that.
> Hillary Clinton, derided as a "dangerous radical" by many Americans stands to the right of Margaret Thatcher on a number of key issues, and she was one of Europe's leading right-wingers. Americans tend to define "patriotism" as a lack of self-criticism: no European takes quite so Jingo-istic a world view as their American counterpart, which (probably) results in a clearer world view.
If only I could share your optimism on that one. I think we have to admit that there is a certain level of jingoism both in the UK and in France, even if it hasn´t reached american levels by far, I´ll give you that. Fortunately in the EU we have the germans to restrain us from too much misplaced "patriotism" :-).
> We don't share the reflex reaction to someone pointing at an obvious screw-up by our politicians by responding "You're just saying that because you're ANTI AMERICAN!" (A charge that gets levelled at me almost daily) I happen to LIKE Americans. Americans as they're depicted in US-made TV shows are welcomed into my home daily. If CSI's "Gil Grissom" was a real person, he'd be a welcome dinner guest. It's not "Americans"I have a problem with: it's AmericanISM. In the years following the US Civil War, the USA sucked in a vast number of immigrants (a surprising proportion of whom came, looked at how others were being exploited, and went straight back home).
Interesting. I didn´t know that.
> And they needed to be assimilated into the existing culture. <....> It's a future situation where, paradoxically, the USA has chosen the path that reaches the crisis first.... and is least suited culturally to deal with the consequences.
Very impressive post, Mr. Walker. Now, how do we put it to our american friends ;-)?

Alex S., USA

The U.S. and Europe have to stop this nonsense, and realize that debates about tactics (i.e. preemptive war versus diplomacy, how much diplomacy proves that other options have been exhausted, etc) are not the same as disagreements about existential threats. To me, the existential threat is clear, and, despite the spectacular nature of a 9/11, should be as or more clear to Europeans as it is to us. That is what British historian Niall Ferguson has correctly called Islamic Bolshevism. It is not in a spirit of bigotry but rather of dedication to liberal Western values that I, as an American who plans to always live in America, do not want the West to accede to the Islamization of Europe, which will happen if we do not rigorously defend our values.
America has too much religion? As a completely secular blue-stater, I happen to agree, and bow to no one in my hope that the Christian fanatics do not take over here. But I'd prefer a few televangelists in Arkansas to the Mullahs who led bonfires in Bradford or the murderers of Mr. Van Gogh. You guys have to get serious about what is at stake here, and could use a little more religion in this struggle even if Bush could do with a little less.
This idea about the the gulf in values is, when one gets down to it, pretty silly. If you prefer social welfare to laissez-faire, great, so do I incidentally, and no one is forcing you to behave any other way. I think the deeper question of preference goes like this: are Bush and Blair preferable, or are they not, to Zarqawi and Al-Sadr? Because believe me when I say that there are plenty of thim living in your midst, and even if its tragic that this casts aspersions on Muslims who dont deserve it, well, that's life guys. Here's hoping the future of the West is surprising (as Mr. Ash suggests) in a good way.

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "In the years following the US Civil War, the USA sucked in a vast number of immigrants (a surprising proportion of whom came, looked at how others were being exploited, and went straight back home)."
|
Actually, Ron, the USA saw huge numbers of immigrants arrive in America well before the US Civil War. The Potato Blight in Ireland in 1845 played a huge role in launching the second wave of Irish immigration to America. Starvation plagued Ireland and within five years, a million Irish were dead while half a million had arrived in America to start a new life. Between 1820 and 1860, the Irish constituted over one third of all immigrants to the United States. In the 1840s, they comprised nearly half of all immigrants to this nation.
|
Source:
http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/immig/irish2.html
See also:
http://www.bergen.org/AAST/Projects/Immigration/waves_of_immigration.html
|
Whether anyone was "exploited" at all is highly debatable inasmuch as you weren't there and have not offered any evidence of that claim. As for the immigrants who later chose to return to their native countries, no one forced them to come to America, and no one forced them to stay, either. The ones who left were better off for their choice, and so was America. America offers an enormous amount of opportunity, but it is not for the lazy or for those who think they are somehow "entitled" to be supported at others' expense.
|
Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "And they needed to be assimilated into the existing culture. The "existing culture" therefore needed to be formulated; translated into a form where immigrants could be tested on it. And the result is in many ways like a religion. It has saints, prophets, holy relics, heretics, and... a central dogma at the heart of it."
|
Immigrants to the US were never "tested" until the latter part of the 19th century, when it became necessary to screen immigrants for contagious diseases. Immigrants were queried about whether they had job skills or relatives in the US who could support them financially, so that they did not become a burden on taxpayers, which was a sensible precaution. That was about the extent of "testing" that was done.

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "The USA's importance as a world power has been in steady decline for decades."
|
Actually, it's exactly the opposite, Ron. The USA's importance as a world power has been in steady ascendance for decades. This is due in large part to the larger role (in fact, the major and primary role) the USA played in resisting the tide of Soviet Communist domination and expansionism during the Cold War. With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the quiet end of the Cold War, the USA became the sole remaining superpower on the planet.
|
Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "Median income in the USA has been in decline since the 1980's." Nope, false again. Once again, it's exactly the opposite. Median income in the USA rose from $35,239 in 1980 to $42,148 in 2000.
|
Feel free to look it up:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/p60-213.pdf
|
Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "The 'poor' are getting both more numerous, and poorer (although not quite as quickly as the rich are getting richer: the poors' slice of a growing 'cake' is getting thinner and thinner... and the process is getting faster)."
|
Even if one was to assume your statement to be true (a highly dubious assumption, since I have not seen any 'evidence' from you that this is the case): So what?
|
There's nothing whatsoever "wrong" with having people who are Poor, just as there is nothing whatsoever "wrong" with having people who are fabulously wealthy. It's completely acceptable to have lots of people who are Poor, and to have some people who are tremendously Rich. And nowhere in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights is there any 'guarantee' of any 'slice' (thinner, thicker or indeterminant) of any economic 'pie'. Nor is there going to be any such 'guarantee'. "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" are guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. "Slices" of economic "pie", housing, employment, health insurance, "median income", warm milk & cookies at bedtime, etc. are NOT 'guaranteed' and are not going to be, either. Equality of Opportunity is guaranteed in the USA. Equality of "Results" is NOT guaranteed.
|
Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "The EU is now a bigger marketplace than the USA, and with a GROWING median income." That's nice, but there's a minor detail you're overlooking. The USA's population is 290 million or so and growing. The EU's population is declining, particularly so in the so-called 'economic powerhouse' country of Germany, and the EU's population as a whole is aging. Within the next 50 years, the EU's population is projected to decline by nearly 100 million due to the aging population and plunging birthrate, while the USA's population is projected to rise by roughly the same amount.

Sue, USA

To Rich Howard, UK:
Having taught in state schools in the US and having sent my children to state schools, I can assure you that no one is forced to pledge allegiance to the flag in school if he doesn't wish to. You also don't appear to distinguish between the enduring patriotism that most Americans feel toward their country and "blind faith in the administration," which, after all, changes every four or eight years. I would like to know what you mean by the administration "banning books." The USA has the First Amendment. It is illegal to ban books from being published. To what censorship case are you referring? Next, your reduction of American aspirations to "being a millionaire actor in Hollywood" is practically hallucinatory. Have you actually talked to real Americans? Finally, you assert, "Europeans think about others, Americans think about themselves." And they say *Americans* are arrogant! I don't expect the world to agree with everything my country does, but your post strikes me as absurdly self-righteous and xenophobic. I lived in the UK for about two years in the eighties, and I noticed about the same proportion of selfish and unselfish individuals there as I have known in the US. No nation or continent has a monopoly on virtue or evil.

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Ron Walker wrote: "It won't ask whether minimum wages are higher in Europe or the USA (They'll just assume that Rich America MUST earn more than poor, pinko Europeans. The UK minimum wage is more £ than the number of $ earned by minimum wage Americans. And that's on top of free healthcare)"
|
I always find it entertaining listening to the musings of people whose thoughts on the subject of economics are utterly divorced from economic realities. You see, it really doesn't matter what the minimum wage in the USA is, since the vast majority of people in the USA earn far more than the minimum wage. The majority of people earning minimum wages in the USA are people employed in temporary, part-time or casual-labor jobs or in jobs whose competency requirements are so low-skill that they don't merit or deserve anything more than minimum wages.
|
The higher UK minimum wage is a perfect example of why ivory-towered academics should not be allowed to set economic policies; higher wages lead to job losses and are a major reason why unemployment increases every time minimum wages are raised. When the cost of a low-skill employee is artificially raised (by government, in the form of higher minimum wages), at some point the cost of employing that individual exceeds the economic value delivered. At that point, it becomes more economically viable to either automate the process or else abolish and eliminate the process entirely.
|
Years ago, there used to be people employed as "gas-station attendants" who would pump your gas for you, check your oil level and clean your windshield. Higher minimum wages, and the willingness of consumers to pump their own gas in return for lower gas prices, resulted in the near-total elimination of those jobs nationwide. The people doing those jobs priced themselves out of existence.
|
It's a fitting measure of your economic ignorance that you would seriously make the laughable claim, as you did, that "And that's on top of free healthcare)". No one with any economic knowledge or understanding would ever seriously claim that a good or service was "free"; the cost of that good or service is simply cost-shifted onto others in the form of higher taxes, or higher costs passed along to consumers.
|
In a Communistic economic model such as the UK health-care system, just as in the old USSR, higher costs and inflationary pressures that should rightly be being paid by consumers are hidden by the ruling regime in order for the ruling regime (the Soviet government; the NHS in England) to triumphantly continue to lie through its teeth and claim that "all this wonderful technology is absolutely free". In reality, of course, higher costs are instead reflected in terms of economic shortages and scarcity. Thus, in the old Soviet Union, bread used to "supposedly" cost 5 kopecks or so -- "exactly what it cost in 1929" or some such nonsense like that; except that at that price, there was never any bread available. Hence, the ever-present long lines of Soviets lining up for hours to try to buy scarce quantities of shoddy, worthless goods.
|
Similarly, supposedly "free" health care in the UK is frequently non-existent and unavailable at the price it's supposedly offered at. It's actually "rationed" care, in which people are forced to languish on waiting lists for months or years on end, desperately hoping they'll get the treatment they need before they die or before their medical conditions deteriorate to the point that treatment is no longer an option. Small wonder that Britons are increasingly traveling to other EU countries and paying thousands of dollars of their own money privately to get the medical treatment they need and are "supposed" to get for "free" in their own country.

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Ron Walker in the UK wrote: "Technology breeds increased productivity. Increased productivity offers a choice - more leisure time for the same level of production, or more production, or a compromise between the two. European cultural aspirations tend towards the "leisure" side of the compromise, the USA towards the "More production" side. That makes the "European" model smarter. Productivity expands faster than the ability to consume or redeploy the surplus labour force. The REAL long-term choice is between "leisure" or "mass unemployment".... It's a future situation where, paradoxically, the USA has chosen the path that reaches the crisis first.... and is least suited culturally to deal with the consequences."
|
Once again, economic theories can make for wonderfully entertaining discussions, but when the marvelous theories fail to pan out in the Real World, then we have a problem.
|
In the imaginary world, the USA is supposedly headed for "mass unemployment" according to Ron. In the Real World, however, the Reality is quite a bit different.
In the Real World, the various economies of the EU have consistently registered sharply higher unemployment rates than that of the United States.
|
Please draw your attention to the following:
|
|
UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE NEW EUROPE see http://assets.cambridge.org/

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Rich Howard, United Kingdom wrote: "Americans have to pledge allegiance to the flag everyday in school. This is the main difference between America and Europe - Americans have blind faith in their administration due to this ingenius propaganda exercise while Europeans question their beliefs due to state education."
|
HAHAHAHAHAHA HEEE HEEE HOHOHOHO OHMYGAWD THAT'S HYSTERICAL...ROTFLMFAO... And they call "AMERICANS" ignorant!!!!!
|
Mr. Howard, your ignorance would be hilarious (well, okay... actually, it WAS hilarious), were it not so pathetic and sad.
|
A couple of corrections to your comments: (1) American school kids DO NOT 'have to pledge allegiance to the flag everyday in school', although many do so. The decision of whether to recite the Pledge is one that is made by individual school districts, and the teachers and parents in those districts.
|
And (2) the Pledge of Allegiance dates back well over 100 years. It has outlasted numerous Presidents and Presidential Administrations - Democratic, Republican, Progressive, Bull Moose Party, whatever. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the current Presidential Administration, or any other one.
|
Since you apparently know nothing about the Pledge of Allegiance in the U.S., its history or its purpose, I'll help clear up your ignorance.

THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE see http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm
http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/flag/1bfc_pledge.html

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Michel Bastian wrote: " I´ll tell you again since you don´t seem to understand: "muslim" is not the same as "terrorist"."
|
Michel, I never claimed that "all" Muslims were terrorists. However, I think that if you look objectively and unemotionally at the facts and the track record of terrorist incidents over the last two decades, you might start to notice a disturbing pattern. Not "all" MUSLIMS are TERRORISTS, and I would never claim that they were, but over the course of the last two decades, most TERRORISTS have been MUSLIMS.
|
I realize I will likely get screamed at by all kinds of hysterical people raging at me and claiming I'm a "racist" (I'm not) and so forth, but that's just the way it goes.
|
If you feel a need to argue and vent, by all means, be my guest, but when you're done, please answer the following question:
|
How many civilian airplanes filled with civilians, have been deliberately suicide-homicide-crashed, into civilian office buildings filled with civilians, by:
(a) Christians?
(b) Catholics?
(c) Protestants?
(d) Jews?
(e) Buddhists?
(f) Shintoists?
(g) Taoists?
(h) Hindus?
(i) Rastafarians?

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Mi9chel Bastian wrote: "Don´t bother flaming me for that because you don´t know France or the french, you´ve never been there, you can´t know even the basics of our society or our history because nobody ever taught you, and you only bother to read biased opinions by people who most likely are just as clueless as you are. All you have are the old american prejudices against the french."
|
Actually, Michel, I don't recall ever "flaming" you. Your perception is probably different from mine, of course, but overall I think I've behaved reasonably and respectfully toward you.
|
Of course, if you're "looking" to be flamed so that you can feel put upon and victimized, that's a different issue, butyou'll have to look for it from someone else. I disagree that I have any "old prejudices against the French" at all. Like you said, I don't know much about the basics of your society, therefore it's pretty well impossible to have any prejudices against a people that are basically unknown to me. All of the articles I cited have been relatively recent ones, as well. Feel free to disagree with my conclusions, of course, but the point here is that I didn't make this stuff up, and I'm clearly not the only person expressing these concerns.
|
Michel Bastian wrote: " I can´t even blame you for that, since the Bush administration has been deliberately stoking that kind of attitude and has obviously killed any interest of neo-con americans to get objective information. Essentially, you have been brought into Bush´s line: blame France, always and for everything."
|
I have to wonder whether you've been hiding in some old cave in Afghanistan for the last few months and have missed what's going on in the world. Chirac flew to Washington to make nice-nice with Bush, since after the election it was obvious that Bush (despite the fondest dreams of the Europeans) is sticking around for a few more years and is not going to go away. Bush reciprocated with a European visit in which he acknowledged there are differences of opinion but said they aren't insurmountable. The volume and ideological pitch of the rhetoric has been turned down on both sides of the Atlantic. The Europeans appear to be grudgingly discovering that Iraq's liberation has not been a totallosss, especially considering that the Iraqi people braved death threats and terrorism to stand in line and vote. (The Iraqi people appear to attach more importance to democracy than many Europeans do, in fact).

Alex S., USA

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Miochel Bastian wrote: "Incidentally, this insistence on immigration being the root of all evil is typical of xenophobes all around the globe. Look to your own back yard: already there are activists trying to stop immigration from Mexico. Ever heard of the "Minutemen Project"? Private, armed militia who patrol the border near Tombstone in an effort to "stem the tide", as they say. Are the "poor and huddled masses" still welcome to these people? I doubt it. It´s xenophobia in the most literal sense of the term: fear of everything that is unusual or foreign. Is that the "american way" you seem to be so proud of? No, I happen to know for a fact that it´s not. It´s Bush´s way."
|
Well, Michel, firstly, I never claimed in any way, shape or form that immigration is 'the root of all Evil'. If you believe somehow that I did make that claim, then kindly show me the post. Otherwise, please don't presume to "tell" me what my position is on immigration. I'm quite capable of stating my position, whatever that position is, by myself.
|
Secondly, I am not "anti-immigration" at all; I am not the slightest bit "xenophobic"; in fact, I personally support allowing more legal immigrants into the USA. Please note the key word in that sentence, Michel: LEGAL. Prior to 9/11, I regarded the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS, now abolished and reconstituted under a new name) as a bunch of nosy thugs and a nuisance, and I would have happily allowed most immigrants into the U.S. without a second thought. The events of 9/11 changed that perspective for me dramatically. I don't personally believe that "every" immigrant is a Terrorist-In-Waiting. But clearly, as 9/11 demonstrated, some of them clearly ARE Terrorists who wish to do us harm. And we in the US have to recognize that and plan our security and immigration policies accordingly.
|
I have no problem whatsoever with LEGAL immigration; in fact, as I mentioned, I think it should be expanded, provided that it does not compromise our national security. However, there's an enormous difference between LEGAL immigrants, and ILLEGAL immigrants.
|
Legal immigrants (obviously) obeyed the law. They followed the legal process for immigrating here. They patiently waited their turn. They were screened for infectious and/or contagious diseases. They were interviewed in their home country by U.S. Consulate people who probably suggested ways for the immigrants to prepare for their move to America (English-language classes, information about adjusting to daily life in America, etc).
|
Illegal immigrants follow none of these processes. They may carry communicable diseases, inclusing some exotic ones that aren't normally found here, that most people have no immunities against and which could easily spread alarmingly. Some of them are barely literate even in their OWN native language. Certainly almost none of them speak English fluently. Most of them have few, if any, job skills or qualifications for anything besides manual labor. Their language difficulties, their lack of marketable job skills, and their status as illegal aliens, combined with their obvious and desperate need to take any job to survive, makes them easy prey for unscrupulous employers who will pay them next to nothing, knowing the illegals are powerless to complain. The presence in job markets of large pools of desperate, exploitable, black-market illegal labor has served to drive down wages in numerous industries, including fruit- and vegetable-harvesting, child care, textile manufacturing and now, increasingly, construction. In many cases, US citizens and legal resident immigrants alike have found themselves priced out of labor markets by illegal labor.
|
I am in favor of continuing to allow legal immigration, provided that the process can be managed for the benefit of both the United States and the immigrants. I also realize that many immigrants are coming from desperately poor Third World countries, including Mexico, and are only trying to survive and attain better lives for their families. However, desperation on "their" part does not "auto-magically" translate into any "obligation" on our part to tolerate the presence on our soil of people who have no right to be here, or exempt them from immigration laws that the rest of us are obligated to follow. It is unrealistic and naive in the extreme to presume that a still-recovering U.S. economy can continue indefinitely to absorb millions of largely unskilled, largely non-English-fluent illegal immigrants who lack critical language and job skills.
|
The Border Patrol is understaffed, and the Southern U.S. border is being overwhelmed with illegal immigrants. Your view of the illegal immigrants as being "poor and huddled masses" is naive and misinformed. Not all the illegals are Mexicans or Central Americans; U.S. Border Patrol officers have arrested Arabs and found Muslim prayer rugs and copies of the Qu'ran. (Al-Qaida's intention to continue to try to infiltrate the U.S. and stage more 9/11-style attacks is well-known). Not all of the illegals are "harmless", either. Some are vicious and murderous "coyotes", immigrant-smugglers who often extort thousands of dollars from impoverished would-be immigrants. Some of these "coyotes" have been known to abandon their immigrants to die in 110-degree heat or drown in rivers. Increasing numbers of illegals are carrying fireams themselves. Please read the following:
|
"During this fiscal year, begun in October, there were 129 incidents of hostile contacts between Border Patrol agents and people trying to enter the country illegally along the 261-mile stretch of border known as the Tucson Sector, said Andrea Zortman, a Border Patrol spokesperson. That equals the total for the entire previous fiscal year."
|
"„That means that they‚re getting more desperate, that we‚re doing our job down here, they‚re trying to get through by any means possible,‰ Maheda told MSNBC.com during a ride-a-long on the border."
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7409293/page/3/
|
Finally, yes, of course I have heard of the MinuteMan Project. A few of the MinuteMan Project volunteers are armed, but the majority of them aren't. They have clear orders not to directly interdict any illegals, only to report them to the Border Patrol. Despite your rather clumsy attempts to smear them as allegedly being xenophobic, racist, one-dimensional, gun-toting Looney-Toons, they are clearly none of those things. And while their attempts at border control are somewhat amateurish, their motives are well-founded and understandable. A nation that loses control of its borders, loses its Sovereignty and its ability to set its own course and destiny.

antti vainio, finland

Phil Karasick from Seattle wrote:
Well, I'm personally sure that you have the gift of premonition and could have magically predicted that 19 fanatics would turn unarmed civilian airliners filled with civilians into human bombs to crash into an unarmed civilian office building filled with civilians. Unfortunately you forgot to share your premonition or else you aren't really as clever as you seem to presume.
I didn't but some people in the US intelligence had a hunch something like this might happen. Unfortunately the baboon who's your adored president ignored this people.Phil wrote: We're not killing innocent people on wholesale. We ARE killing lots of GUILTY people on wholesale. I like that. I hope we keep doing it.
Iraq didn't have anything to do with the Twin Towers. You're killing the wrong guys but I suppose you like that as well.
Phil Wrote:
Well, I'm afraid I have no interest in visiting Europe.
Sorry, I forgot that only intelligent Americans travel.
Phil wrote:You see, I'm an average American who happens to think that my President (whom I helped to elect) is doing a great job. So great a job, in fact, that I along with about 65 million other Americans voted to give him four more years in office to continue his work. And if you have a problem with my country's President, then I think I have a problem with you.
In that case you have a problem with 95% of the human race
Phil wrot:e It's easy for everyone to be literate in Finland when you have a homogenous population of only 5 million and all of them are basically related to each other through interbreeding.
Not a problem in Europe, we have wildly varied gene stock, people who are ready to move in another country and nonexistent borders. I have understood that in those red states in USA you've got a lot of guys who are cross-eyed but who play banjo damn well.
Phil wrote:You see, unlike the situation in Finland, people from around the world actually want to come here to America to live, work and study. I haven't noticed kazillions of people eagerly emigrating to Finland, have you?
You probably don't have a clue how the European union works. You are allowed in one country you allowed in all of them. The kazillions don't want to come to Finland because we have a rotten climate and hostile population but yeah, kazillions want to come to Europe, which is kind of selective members only club.
I'm wandering if Phil Karasick actually exists, he's kind of funny stereotype of many European prejudices against Americans. even if not, keep going, at least you're entertaining

antti vainio, finland

and finally to Phil in Seattle:
I just Spent a week in Sarajevo which is predominantly muslim capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina. fucking great time I had there, the city's got the best vibe in the whole Europe
and it was not only us Europeans, the Australians and the Japanese though so as well.
really, f*** off Phil. the Australians with their cool attitude and backpacks conquer the world, your kind burn in hell (the section reserved for American bigots). good fucking riddance

Michel Bastian, France

To Phil Karasick:
> How many civilian airplanes filled with civilians, have been deliberately suicide-homicide-crashed, into civilian office buildings filled with civilians, by:
(a) Christians?
(b) Catholics?
(c) Protestants?
(d) Jews?
(e) Buddhists?
(f) Shintoists?
(g) Taoists?
(h) Hindus?
(i) Rastafarians?
So because a few lunatics commited mass murder the american government has a right to retaliate against people who had nothing to do with it? Strange logic...

Michel Bastian, France

To Phil Karasick:
> Actually, Michel, I don't recall ever "flaming" you.
Short memory you have there.
> Your perception is probably different from mine, of course, but overall I think I've behaved reasonably and respectfully toward you.
50/50. But that´s to be expected in this kind of debate.
> I disagree that I have any "old prejudices against the French" at all. Like you said, I don't know much about the basics of your society, therefore it's pretty well impossible to have any prejudices against a people that are basically unknown to me.
Wrong Phil, not only is it possible to have prejudices against something you don´t know, it´s actually quite likely. Therefore your remarks along the line of "I´m not interested in visiting or learning about Europe" just tell me one thing: you don´t want to know. You´re not interested (for whatever reason). Fair enough, though I can´t understand your reasons, that´s your right. But in that case don´t judge Europe, because you have no factual basis for an assessment. It´s a bit like saying "I don´t like Lasagne" without ever having eaten Lasagne, just because somebody told you he didn´t like Lasagne.
Sure, the french (and the europeans) have made their share of mistakes, and I´d be the last to deny that. You´ll find open criticism of decisions by the french or european governments in many of my posts not related to the Iraq war (the last one was when the question of the chinese arms embargo came up). However, I absolutely refuse to have the french, the germans or any other european state picked upon and labeled "traitors" or "whimps" just because they disagreed on Iraq. Especially since in my eyes (and in the eyes of most of my compatriots) this decision by the french and germans was absolutely right and since in this case, the Bush administration was wrong, not the french government.
> All of the articles I cited have been relatively recent ones, as well. Feel free to disagree with my conclusions, of course, but the point here is that I didn't make this stuff up, and I'm clearly not the only person expressing these concerns.
Well, the articles you cite (btw, do us and the board administrators a favor: when you cite an article, just put in a link or cite the sentences you´re referring to; don´t copy the whole article; it´ll save you, the administrators and us a lot of work) usually tend to come from biased sources. When somebody tells me that France is "likely to be the first european government to introduce Sharia" I just cannot take him seriously. Nobody who´s ever lived even near France can take him seriously. It´s a massive overdramatization that only serves to stroke the collective american ego (as in: "see, we´re better than the french whimps, because they ´ve practically given their country to the muslims", "muslims" being equated with "enemies" in this instance). It´s just not true, ok. If you won´t take my word for it, the only way I can convince you is by telling you to move your behind over here and have a look for yourself. Actually to really understand what´s going on in Europe, you´d have to come and live here for a few months, like I did in the US, but I realize that´s not possible. Well, if you can´t do that, then at least try to get informed by more objective sources.
> I have to wonder whether you've been hiding in some old cave in Afghanistan for the last few months and have missed what's going on in the world.
So much for "respectfull".
> Chirac flew to Washington to make nice-nice with Bush, since after the election it was obvious that Bush (despite the fondest dreams of the Europeans) is sticking around for a few more years and is not going to go away. Bush reciprocated with a European visit in which he acknowledged there are differences of opinion but said they aren't insurmountable. The volume and ideological pitch of the rhetoric has been turned down on both sides of the Atlantic. The Europeans appear to be grudgingly discovering that Iraq's liberation has not been a total loss,
Interesting, now you´re admitting that Iraq was "not a total loss". A few weeks back you´d probably have claimed that it was a total success.
> especially considering that the Iraqi people braved death threats and terrorism to stand in line and vote. (The Iraqi people appear to attach more importance to democracy than many Europeans do, in fact).
Again, this remark shows me that you´re not interested in facts. You´re interested in being right and proving to everybody else that the US are the best country in the world. Anything that doesn´t support this assessment gets ignored or played down. You want me to tell you that Bush was right and that Chirac ate crow? Well, my perception of the events was a bit different. Bush has finally come to realise that he can´t just browbeat the europeans. He has come to realise that he needs their cooperation, in Iraq and elsewhere (in Lebanon for example). Therefore, although he can´t very well admit that he was wrong and Chirac was right, he´s doing the next best thing, and that´s to tone down and pretend the american/european rift doesn´t exist.

Michel Bastian, France

To Phil Karasick:
> Well, Michel, firstly, I never claimed in any way, shape or form that immigration is 'the root of all Evil'. If you believe somehow that I did make that claim, then kindly show me the post.
Well, I was under the impression you were criticising France for letting in muslims from Africa and the middle east. If that´s not a negative opinion on immigration, what is?
> Otherwise, please don't presume to "tell" me what my position is on immigration. I'm quite capable of stating my position, whatever that position is, by myself.
Be my guest.
> Secondly, I am not "anti-immigration" at all; I am not the slightest bit "xenophobic"; in fact, I personally support allowing more legal immigrants into the USA. Please note the key word in that sentence, Michel: LEGAL. Prior to 9/11, I regarded the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS, now abolished and reconstituted under a new name) as a bunch of nosy thugs and a nuisance, and I would have happily allowed most immigrants into the U.S. without a second thought. The events of 9/11 changed that perspective for me dramatically. I don't personally believe that "every" immigrant is a Terrorist-In-Waiting. But clearly, as 9/11 demonstrated, some of them clearly ARE Terrorists who wish to do us harm. And we in the US have to recognize that and plan our security and immigration policies accordingly.
Well, that might be your opinion, and in that case I agree with you. However, what articles like the one you cited do is play up on xenophobia, and very quickly, that will lead to popular perception of immigration being the cause for everything that goes wrong in the US and Europe. Case in point: the Minutemen Project (that doesn´t have anything to do with terrorists, incidentally).
> Illegal immigrants follow none of these processes. They may carry communicable diseases, inclusing some exotic ones that aren't normally found here, that most people have no immunities against and which could easily spread alarmingly. Some of them are barely literate even in their OWN native language. Certainly almost none of them speak English fluently. Most of them have few, if any, job skills or qualifications for anything besides manual labor. Their language difficulties, their lack of marketable job skills, and their status as illegal aliens, combined with their obvious and desperate need to take any job to survive, makes them easy prey for unscrupulous employers who will pay them next to nothing, knowing the illegals are powerless to complain. The presence in job markets of large pools of desperate, exploitable, black-market illegal labor has served to drive down wages in numerous industries, including fruit- and vegetable-harvesting, child care, textile manufacturing and now, increasingly, construction. In many cases, US citizens and legal resident immigrants alike have found themselves priced out of labor markets by illegal labor.
In other words: no poor and huddled masses anymore, just the skilled workers and scientist that will bring more bucks to the american economy? I do admit, though, that you have a point in many of the things you mentioned above. There are problems with immigration. And lo and behold: we have the same problems in Europe: difficulty to integrate into european culture, no job qualifications, etc. etc. BUT that doesn´t mean Europe is wide open to a tsunami of radical muslims that will take over the whole show within two weeks, same as the US government and society will not be taken over by mexican immigrants anytime soon.
> I am in favor of continuing to allow legal immigration, provided that the process can be managed for the benefit of both the United States and the immigrants. I also realize that many immigrants are coming from desperately poor Third World countries, including Mexico, and are only trying to survive and attain better lives for their families. However, desperation on "their" part does not "auto-magically" translate into any "obligation" on our part to tolerate the presence on our soil of people who have no right to be here, or exempt them from immigration laws that the rest of us are obligated to follow. It is unrealistic and naive in the extreme to presume that a still-recovering U.S. economy can continue indefinitely to absorb millions of largely unskilled, largely non-English-fluent illegal immigrants who lack critical language and job skills.
Again, welcome to the club.
> The Border Patrol is understaffed, and the Southern U.S. border is being overwhelmed with illegal immigrants. Your view of the illegal immigrants as being "poor and huddled masses" is naive and misinformed. Not all the illegals are Mexicans or Central Americans; U.S. Border Patrol officers have arrested Arabs and found Muslim prayer rugs and copies of the Qu'ran. (Al-Qaida's intention to continue to try to infiltrate the U.S. and stage more 9/11-style attacks is well-known). Not all of the illegals are "harmless", either. Some are vicious and murderous "coyotes", immigrant-smugglers who often extort thousands of dollars from impoverished would-be immigrants. Some of these "coyotes" have been known to abandon their immigrants to die in 110-degree heat or drown in rivers. Increasing numbers of illegals are carrying fireams themselves. Please read the following:
> "During this fiscal year, begun in October, there were 129 incidents of hostile contacts between Border Patrol agents and people trying to enter the country illegally along the 261-mile stretch of border known as the Tucson Sector, said Andrea Zortman, a Border Patrol spokesperson. That equals the total for the entire previous fiscal year."
|
> "≥That means that they∫re getting more desperate, that we∫re doing our job down here, they∫re trying to get through by any means possible,≈ Maheda told MSNBC.com during a ride-a-long on the border."
All of this is perfectly understandable. However, do not make the mistake of reverting to xenophobia because of these developments. Europeans know it´s hard to avoid resentment in the population against "foreigners". God knows we have a lot of the same problems. But don´t stoke (or cite articles that stoke) xenophobia because of that.
> Finally, yes, of course I have heard of the MinuteMan Project. A few of the MinuteMan Project volunteers are armed, but the majority of them aren't. They have clear orders not to directly interdict any illegals, only to report them to the Border Patrol. Despite your rather clumsy attempts to smear them as allegedly being xenophobic, racist, one-dimensional, gun-toting Looney-Toons, they are clearly none of those things. And while their attempts at border control are somewhat amateurish, their motives are well-founded and understandable. A nation that loses control of its borders, loses its Sovereignty and its ability to set its own course and destiny.
So why doesn´t the Bush administration reinforce the border patrols then instead of letting civilians that are, by your own admission, ill prepared, ill equipped, some of them armed and probably personally biased against foreigners do the job? This vigilante mentality is a recipe for disaster.

Ross Gurung, France

Temptation is very high amongst some duds to propagate smear campaign against in general the EU and in particular France which is one of the major actors of this mainstream of human achievement, i.e. the European Union.
In this vast complex, some of them hazard a guess out of little hazy knowledge and try to create sensational event out of nothing. Somebody pays them to create 'spin' against France. I can easily name some of them such as Stryker McGuire and Eric Pope, two stooges of procons and assertive Nationalists who hide themselves behind the curtain of Reporters (Newsweek). Shame on them, they never learned to be a think tank. Instead, they scribble down their hatred and spread misunderstandings between especially France and the USA as their masters trained them to do so. Poor little runts! It makes us darf!
Effectively I shall try to abridge the long Mediterranean history in order to thwart the cliché of eventual invasion of France by Arabs. If we consult the recent history, what we find is; a Governor of Tanger crossed the border (711 AD) and settled down in the South of Spain. Shortly after some years, a Caliph of Damascus fled the present Syria, as he was dethroned, headed straight to Cordu in Spain. As a result of which, some years later, Cordu became a great Muslim Cultural Centre with an University and all other facilities for Research and so on., where even the scholars of Christian European Countries such as Germany and Sweden to cite, came to learn Geometry and Architecture. Further, the Turks and Arabs as a whole, tried to expand their domination by invading France but Charles Martel defeated their coalition severely at Poitier in 732. Thereafter, the Christians of Spain pushed them back to the South of Spain. They occupied Grenada for about 1000 years. When Isabel of Castile and her husband Ferdinand of Aragon (the same who sent Columbus to discover India but, by chance, he discovered the present USA in 1492) came to power, things started changing swiftly. All Christian Kings gathered their armies to change the fate of Spain. Therefore, why there were sporadic but determining battles against the Turks and the Maurs. If we believe Cervantes his famous Don Quichote was written (1605) with the backdrop of the battle of Christians of North Spain against the Turks (1571). The aftermath was most of the Turks were thrown into the sea and the remaining ones were compelled to change their religion if they longed to live there. So why, today some of the descendants of those Turks now Spanish in every aspect, fervently argue in favour of Turkey to be in the EU.
At the same time, let us not forget the Ottomans alias Turks. Ultimately, the Balkan countries expelled them definitely (1683).
Furthermore, when Napoleon 1st. invaded Egypt (1798-1801) he was so much impressed by its advanced past civilization dating back to 3,000 years BC that he brought with him some of the masterpieces of the finest monuments. Nowadays, Louvre in Paris exposes them for the pleasure of the visitors. The Obelisk of ŒPlace de la Concorde' located at the next end of Champs Elysée is just eye catching. France offered the other twin obelisk to the USA in token of everlasting friendship between the two countries. Let us not forget another famous present of France named as the Statue of Liberty. The same Obelisk now stands boldly just near by the White House in Washington, the Capital.
When France colonized Algeria (1830), Tunisia and Morocco, as she had the governance of a King named as Louis Philippe, they behaved cruelly in the treatment of local administration. Later on, France and England colonized all African continents from the west and the east respectively, until 1962 when De Gaulle released the west side from the French stronghold.
At the time of WWII, many Africans including Algerian and Moroccan Spahis took part in the delivery of France from the Nazi's grip. Many of them gave their lives for France. Thousands of them were buried near Strasburg in Alsace (east of France). To comprise the searing cause and effect, resulting in the long overdue awareness amongst our American friends, they are worried about the increasing number of Muslims in the EU including England where millions of Pakistanis, Nigerians etc. precipitated to have their parts in the riches of the past colonists. Germany badly needed extra working arms to rebuild new Germany right from the scratch after the disaster of the WWII. They simply asked the Turks to come to Germany and help them erect the houses and the factories. Now one can count them in millions. There are as yet long years to pass (at least 20 years) if Turkey would meet the criteria to join or not to join the EU. At present, there is incompatibility of social behaviours, which are exactly on the antipodes. I dare say it needs rash impulse to make them match.
Of course, France is extremely aware of the increasing Muslim population. Therefore, why some concrete measures are already underway to diminish their numbers by scattering them all over the territory thus avoiding them to concentrate in a compact community like in England. Another country, another solution is applied. In France whom so ever tries to create a subversive group is immediately punished by law. Only the trained French born Imams can deliver the conferences in the Mosques. Not to forget the Muslim territories (DOM-TOM) such as Comoro and Mayetta in the Indian Ocean.
Slogans such as 'Liberty, Equality and Fraternity' of French Flag as well as the French Official Institutions bemuse and irritate our American friends. Albeit, for other overseas if the Americans become out of themselves to some extent impatient, it is to get themselves distinguished in their hierarchical class system, it is nothing more than a childish crush course, where a hunk of dollars in the Banks determines their ranks and positions in the Society. So why, more and more isolated Fortresses with strict security measures are built here and there all over the country.
Are they, by the way, scared of their fellow beings that eventually dwell the next door? Doctor, is that serious?
In France, Zinedine Zidane, a soccer player who is Kabil by his origin (Algeria), won with his team the World Soccer Cup in1998. In addition, in monthly poll, he is always placed at the 1st. rank in France. Couscous of North Africa is a much appreciated culinary dish in France. All Tunisians, Algerians and Moroccans see the French TV everyday. Now France has become sort of a melting pot of many nationalities, as it was New York of late.
In light of all that, everyone can notice that there is no facial racism in France. Except, sometimes the incidents of Anti-Semitism of the Arab origin youths and sympathisers of Palestine when they see on TV the outburst of violence and the misfortune of their fellow beings because of Sharon's inflexible politics. To confirm my say one can ask the black Americans and their fruitful episodes as Jazz men in France late fifties, sixties, seventies and so on. One who is under the banner of the Republic and one who abides by the rules and regulations as well as the strict secular objectives of it, thanks to the law of 1905 which clearly separates the Church and the Republic after ages of domination and abuses by the Religious potentials, he or she is taken as one of the wards of the Republic, no matter what country and race he or she hails from.
In the aggregate, the Sultan of Brunei and the Princes of the Middle East are the owners of many Hotel Palaces. What about the deposit of 50 Milliard $ in the American and the English Banks? If it occurs, all of a sudden, they have the crooked idea to retire their cash holdings and assets, the Crash of 1929 would be just an ordinary incident compared to the life to come. So why, empty mind is devil's workshop. Let devil stay confined to the Magic Box or say Pandora's Box. Pandora the first woman of the humanity after the Greek mythology, of course everybody knows this legend, that she let escape all sins and vices except hope. How far it is true or not everybody is entitled to experience them in everyday life.
P.S.1: Please read the best seller, "The European Dream" by Jeremy Rifkin, an eminent but controversial US author and University lecturer, only if you are in favour of the EU.
P.S.2: Last fall, I deliberately forgot to wade thru' the famous Crusades (XI to XIII centuries), because they give me the pip and I perceive there no positive vibes.
Now to abbreviate the same I would begin with the Summons of the Pope Urban II to all Christians of Europe while the Muslims occupied the holy Shrines of Christianity in Jerusalem. Taken together, eight Crusades took place from 1096 to 1270. These Crusades were the consequences of the fervent devotion to the Jesus Christ of the European Occidental Christian Kings and Knights. That made them to declare wars against the Muslim occupants of Jerusalem. Furthermore, some of them were very renowned in Europe such as Richard 1st. Lion's Heart, Count of Toulouse, Philippe August, Louis VII the Emperor Conrad III and Louis IX alias Saint Louis. The Knights under the commandment of Godfroy de Bouillon occupied Jerusalem (July 11, 1099) and founded the Oriental Latin States. Later on, the 2nd. Crusade was undertaken by the King of France Louis VII and the Emperor Conrad III. The Pope Gregory VIII launched the 3rd. Crusade again against the new occupation of Jerusalem by Saladin (1187). The Kings such as Frederic 1st. Barbarous of Germany, Philippe August of France and Richard 1st. Lion's heart of England joined the Pope in his adventure. Again, because Frederic 2nd. was in better terms with the Sultan of Egypt, Jerusalem and the roads leading to it were liberated by the Treaty of Peace signed in Jerusalem (1192). In this configuration, towards 1244 when the French Monarch Saint Louis launched the 7th. Crusade (1244-1257) the Muslims captured him (1250) and he was liberated only after the payment of heavy ransom. He constructed some Fortresses in Damascus. When the King launched the eighth as well as the last Crusade, he became the victim of plague and died near Tunis.
All these eight Crusades of Occidental Christian Kings and Knights were advanced by the invasion of England by William 1st. the Conqueror (1066) the Duke of Normandy. In addition, the hordes of Mongols led by Genghis Khan (1167-1227) swept thru' Europe as his predecessor Attila (451) did the same by looting the rich but corny weak European Monarchs.
In this layout, I shortened all these painstaking explications largely to help the readers understand by themselves that nobody until now, right from the beginning could occupy the European Continents coming from out side the borders. Therefore, you need not worry about the future of the EU. In addition, the Muslim's imaginative invasion of the Europe is quite fake and null and void. However, it could also be a rip-off of some crooked mind. That's that.

Alex S., USA

<< I just Spent a week in Sarajevo which is predominantly muslim capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina. fucking great time I had there, the city's got the best vibe in the whole Europe
and it was not only us Europeans, the Australians and the Japanese though so as well.
really, f*** off Phil. the Australians with their cool attitude and backpacks conquer the world, your kind burn in hell (the section reserved for American bigots). good fucking riddance >>
Oh my, where to start with this little gem. I can recall a time in my own short life when Sarajevo did not have the "best vibe" in all of Europe, in fact, when it's probably safe to say that it had the worst. I can recall a time when the Europeans, some of whom on this site are now mouthing platitudes about how you all have learned the wonders of peaceful international deliberation, allowed, once again, concentration camps to fill your own gack yard, while you deliberated endlessly at conference after conference. America did not behave much better, but as I recall it was Clinton and Blair who finally stepped in and said "enough" to the Serbs, and set the stage for Sarajevo becoming a place you could visit instead of a magnet for mortar shells. I don't recall that backpackers with cool atitudes had much to do with solving that problem.

Madelon ter Kuile, Netherlands

My opinion, while I have never been in America but of course what I heard from other people (having visited America) and what I have read - for instance I also get mail from the Democratic Party, but also in papers about for instance the Kyoto-protocol or the role of the church or whatever ..... I will write down here.
Isn't true that there is a rather big gap, also in values, between the democrats and the republicans?
In any case I feel a gigantic gap in values compared to the republicans. Bluntly said it is my opinion that the values of the republicans are of the middle-ages, for instance. The question I also ask myself (a big doubt and a fear!): do they for instance have any or enough consciounce? For instance by critical! open-ness, really!, for asking inner questions, while looking at the world and events .. things .. , to themselves?
Also I think/fear there is a possibility that the church, while of course they also do good things (but also really bad things!), can take consciounceness away!

J., USA

I‚m a US citizen attending a university in the United Kingdom. I‚ve been in the UK now for about three years, and to be honest, I‚m tired of having this debate. Most of all, I‚m tired of being stereotyped. It‚s exhausting! For the record, I voted for Kerry and consider myself a liberal, but that doesn‚t seem to matter. Over the past three years, I‚ve been mocked, socially ostracized, chased, and even attacked (on two occasions). I have had unpleasant conversations with old women, children, rubbish collectors, shop keepers, businesspeople, my professors, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, etc. etc. etc. I don‚t even like opening my mouth to talk anymore because my accent gives me away.
I‚ve met people from all over the world at this university, and to be quite honest with everyone in this forum, our separate cultural values and attitudes are pretty much the same. We all seem to share a tendency to generalise about other cultures. I believe the „our culture is better than your culture‰ attitude is universal. While it‚s shocking to witness and experience blind American hatred and ignorance, it‚s equally shocking to witness and experience blind European hatred and ignorance first hand.
When is this going to stop?

Mike Morrall, Birmingham, UK

Dear J,
You do have my sympathy. It must be quite unpleasant being a Yank here at the moment! As you have found out, every country has its' Trailer Trash, but ignorance is produced by the ignorant. Most people here do not blame you for the mistakes of your country's administration and recognise that America is divided culturally. I was amazed to find out that only 1 in 8 americans has a passport, in Europe, as you know, the figure is roughly the reverse. It would be a shame if americans are put off traveling, as this promotes understanding.

Michael Bastian, France

To J:
> I∫m a US citizen attending a university in the United Kingdom. <.....>I∫ve been mocked, socially ostracized, chased, and even attacked (on two occasions). I have had unpleasant conversations with old women, children, rubbish collectors, shop keepers, businesspeople, my professors, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, etc. etc. etc. I don∫t even like opening my mouth to talk anymore because my accent gives me away.
I´m very sorry to hear that (especially that bit about being attacked). Just goes to show that, since the Iraq war, the whole debate tends to degenerate into an emotional free-for-all. Perhaps you´re right. Perhaps we should stop emphasizing our differences and start concentrating on the things we have in common. Put Iraq behind us, whatever our opinions on it.
> I∫ve met people from all over the world at this university, and to be quite honest with everyone in this forum, our separate cultural values and attitudes are pretty much the same.
Not that different, actually, you´re quite right.
> We all <.....> first hand.
When is this going to stop?
It won´t. All we can do is try to run with it and moderate the debate so we don´t stop talking to each other out of spite. Thank god for political forums like this one where we can communicate.

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Antti Vainio in Finland wrote: "I didn't but some people in the US intelligence had a hunch something like this might happen. Unfortunately the baboon who's your adored president ignored this people."
|
Actually, that's complete hogwash. It's a bunch of BS. Please "prove" it or else withdraw your false and slanderous statements.
|
To begin with, no one in the U.S. intelligence community had any solid evidence or proof that civilian airliners would be turned into massive human bombs and hurled into civilian office buildings. The reason this is so is quite simple, it had never been done before. There was suspicion that airplanes might be hijacked and passengers taken hostage, but that's been occurring, with varying levels of frequency, for about 40 years now. There are procedures that have existed for decades and which are set up to deal with an airplane hijacking, none of which would have worked or made the slightest bit of difference on 9/11 because those response procedures have been based for forty-plus years on the expectation that the hijackers' intentions would be to hijack the airliner, take the passengers hostage, use them as living breathing bargaining chips, make some public political statement on behalf of some cause, eventually release the passengers and go into political exile somewhere. The procedures were never envisioned or intended to deal with a situation in which the hijackers were homicidal and suicidal fanatics who had no intention of surviving and whose goals included meeting Allah in an office building at 500 m.p.h.
Secondly, our elected President George W. Bush never "ignored" anyone in the intelligence community with regard to the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, because (once again) there were never any warnings or information that was specific and detailed enough to be "actionable" information.
(I'd make reference to your own President or Prime Minister or Grand Poobah or whoever he / she is, but no one here recalls his / her name because it's not as if Finland's leaders really matter or have any importance or relevence).

Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA

Antti Vainio in Finland wrote: "Iraq didn't have anything to do with the Twin Towers. You're killing the wrong guys but I suppose you like that as well."
I never once claimed that Iraq had anything to do with the World Trade Center. Maybe you did? We're killing the right guys in Iraq, though. We're killing the insurgents who want to overthrow Iraq's first democratically elected government and who want to re-install Sadly Insane Hussein. We're killing the right people. And that's how it should be. Those people need killing.

antti vainio, finland

to Alex S
bombing away the Serbs and siding with muslims was probably not politically correct but right thing to do. we Europeans fucked up in every possible way in places like Srebrenica.sad facts and I don't wan't to deny them. but that was the Clinton administration and you are throwing away all the goodwill you gained back then. I don't know, looks like you don't care about what people outside of US thinks

antti vainio, finland

to J, USA
that's part of being a bully. they have never been actually that popular anywhere. just try to accommodate and stop whining, if you go on like that it just gets worse

Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Debate - Page 7/13