Which is more socially conservative: The US or the EU?

The Browser

I work in the Middle East with Indians and Arabs. We all have a great relationship both inside and outside the office. They often ask me about "the west" and its social mores. Generally, among those who don't view the west monolithically, they consider Europe (by Europe, let's take it to mean EEA countries) to be more conservative than the US.

This surprised me for several reasons. I had always considered Europe to be more liberal, based on its attitudes towards religosity, the environment, science and society (think evolution debates), medical care, and sexuality.

But my colleagues hold up examples such as attitudes to immigration, free speech, freedom to carry a gun, and the ban on the Burqa as evidence that Europe is more conservative than the US (even where Euro countries haven't banned the burqa, it's still a pretty hot topic).

This really made me think. I had viewed the US's right to bear arms as a conservative attitude, actually, in that the view is to uphold rights that, generations ago, were important in a frontier country. But today, I view it as a conservative demand and I think that the progressive, or liberal approach, would be to control ownership. And yes, I see the contradiction there!

I would regard Europe as more liberal in terms of religosity, science and society, and sexuality. Despite the fact that several European states have state religions, in practice this does not seem to matter; and states that do have state religions seem further along the post-Christian road.

How would you explain to a non-westerner what the social and political differences between Europe and America are?

hyperborean

Sounds about right, the european west is much more socialy conservative than the US,

The thing with the good old US or A is that the they have a very vocal conservative community so I can see why we as europeans might sometimes the US is a more conseravtive country when in actual fact the US is like sodom and gomorrah to those crazy religious types.

Dannyboy83

The Browser wrote: »

How would you explain to a non-westerner what the social and political differences between Europe and America are?

First you'd have to explain the social and political differences within Europe, and within the USA.

I would regard Europe as more liberal in terms of religosity, science and society, and sexuality.

There are states in the US which allow gay marriage.
Ukraine wants to ban Spongebob squarepants cause they think he's gay.
Eight European countries legally recognize same-sex marriage.
.
.

There is an entire spectrum of opinion in Europe and the USA.

About the only comparison you could make is to say that opinions are diverse.

Godge

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

First you'd have to explain the social and political differences within Europe, and within the USA.



There are states in the US which allow gay marriage.
Ukraine wants to ban Spongebob squarepants cause they think he's gay.
Eight European countries legally recognize same-sex marriage.
.
.

There is an entire spectrum of opinion in Europe and the USA.

About the only comparison you could make is to say that opinions are diverse.

Exactly, take four States, Utah, Iowa, California and New Jersey and you will see vast differences between them in terms of social mores.

Ditto any four diverse countries across Europe. Say, Ukraine, Turkey, UK and Sweden.

Sindri

By socially conservative I'd imagine America is much more so. They have a definite historically established culture there that they idealize, and definite established social constructs/values. Being white, Christian, capitalist, a fixation on government and rights, freedom and a general insularity. Their political culture is also very heavily influenced by it and by the above.

C14N

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

There are states in the US which allow gay marriage.
Ukraine wants to ban Spongebob squarepants cause they think he's gay.
Eight European countries legally recognize same-sex marriage.

Ukraine is not even a member of the EEA and is definitely very different to what most would consider the "west". A lot of countries that would quite recently have been in the USSR are still developing.

It's not just the numbers of countries that legalise same-sex marriage, it's the societal attitude to gays in general. In America, there seems to be a huge push back against anything pro-gay and this is accepted and broadcasted on public TV for millions of people to watch and agree with. Maybe I'm incredibly ignorant but I just don't see stuff like that happening in France or Germany or any other western European countries.

In general I would definitely disagree that the US is more liberal. The issue of gun control is true but other than that I can't think of any other issues where this happens. The burqa one isn't all one way conservatism since many will argue that it is done in the name of women's rights.

Eggy Baby!

A story:

My friend told me he saw a video on Youtube by a "PHD". He said that in this video (which was about the evolution/creation debate and took a slant presumably towards evolutionism) the gentleman quoted a certain survey which said that 64% of Americans believed in creationism. My friend stated that creationism was defined as the traditional "Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden, God created the world in seven days and blew life into clay" sort of thing.

My friend is Irish, and he quoted this survey in an attempt to bolster his own preconceptions of the Americans being backward or religious (he equated the two).

Later on, I looked up the survey. He, and the "PHD" in fact, had misinterpreted the survey. 64% of Americans actually wanted to have creationism taught alongside evolutionism in schools. I then looked up a definition for the term creationism and I discovered that it is a blanket term defining a belief that life was created by a divine entity, not just the definition as set out in the Old Testament. So I think he, as a European, was gullible to believe that those "backward Americans" all followed that Garden of Eden guff.

So basically, the moral of the story is that for sure there is a perception in Europe that Americans are more conservative than they actually are. Really it would depend on what part of Europe you are from. For example, in Ireland we are more conservative than most parts of Europe. Our attitudes towards abortion are pretty strict, whereas in France, the UK etc. they are very liberal towards it. The Americans would be more conservative towards abortion than most of Europe but that excludes Ireland. But I don't agree with abortion anyway so I don't believe we are at a loss.

Anyway, a bit of responding:

It's not just the numbers of countries that legalise same-sex marriage, it's the societal attitude to gays in general. In America, there seems to be a huge push back against anything pro-gay and this is accepted and broadcasted on public TV for millions of people to watch and agree with. Maybe I'm incredibly ignorant but I just don't see stuff like that happening in France or Germany or any other western European countries.

If I'm honest, tolerance of homosexuality will depend massively on where you live in the USA. The USA is rather like Europe in that there is not a consensus throughout (except regarding intolerance of Communism or other extreme ideologies). For example, in the urban areas up north or on the coast there will usually be an extremely vibrant gay culture. It goes without saying that down south and in the centre of the country there isn't much acceptance.

Even in Ireland there is a lot of taboo surrounding homosexuality (largely because of the cancerous influence of the church over the last century plus) but attitudes are largely freeing up, again depending on where you are.

In large parts of Dublin, you'll find strong acceptance of gays, whereas if you live up where I am in hillybilly Meath, well .... let's just say I knew a few lesbians who "played both sides" just to be accepted.

By socially conservative I'd imagine America is much more so. They have a definite historically established culture there that they idealize, and definite established social constructs/values. Being white, Christian, capitalist, a fixation on government and rights, freedom and a general insularity. Their political culture is also very heavily influenced by it and by the above.

I don't know if it just me, but I find the Americans incredibly militaristic. Maybe its just that I live in a neutral country. There's a lot of reverence over there for veterans and there's a lot of drum-beating during times of war (not to mention the servile media).

(I'm mentally riffing here, but I think there is so much anti-war sentiment in Europe because we suffered so much during the world wars. Perhaps the presence of these historical events planted seeds of anti-war sentiment in our heads? Just a suggestion)

avalon68

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

A story:


I don't know if it just me, but I find the Americans incredibly militaristic. Maybe its just that I live in a neutral country. There's a lot of reverence over there for veterans and there's a lot of drum-beating during times of war (not to mention the servile media).

(I'm mentally riffing here, but I think there is so much anti-war sentiment in Europe because we suffered so much during the world wars. Perhaps the presence of these historical events planted seeds of anti-war sentiment in our heads? Just a suggestion)

This really depends on where you are - I'm in New England and really don't find people to be all that pro war. They do of course support the troops out there, but in fairness, if Irish troops were out there you would wish their safe return whether you are pro war or not. The soldiers out there fighting are not the ones pushing war, that's the pencil pushers far behind the lines. So basically i guess I'm trying to say support for troops does not equate support for war. There is. Also the stark reality that cutting back t he military would result in a massive increase in unemployment levels.

southsiderosie

Sindri wrote: »

By socially conservative I'd imagine America is much more so. They have a definite historically established culture there that they idealize, and definite established social constructs/values. Being white, Christian, capitalist, a fixation on government and rights, freedom and a general insularity. Their political culture is also very heavily influenced by it and by the above.

The US is not alone in idealizing its own history. Also, given the decentralized structure of the state, it seems to me that there is actually less of a fixation on government than in Europe, where the government is much more present in peoples' lives on a daily basis.

Also, in what European country is being white and Christian not a part of 'established' culture? If it were not, Europeans would not be struggling as much as they are with immigration. The US may be majority white and Christian, but Americans are much more liberal when it comes to living in an multi-ethnic society and respecting religious difference than their European counterparts. Not to mention the fact that some states like California are already minority-majority.

The Corinthian

To begin with, neither the US nor Western Europe, are homogeneous entities, so at best we can only make aggregate observations. Nonetheless, I do believe that social attitudes in Western Europe and the United States of America have been largely shaped by our differing history.

Western Europe has a long history, to begin with, which has slowly moved from undemocratic, authoritarian and centralized rule to a more democratic, liberal and federal system. The US, on the other hand, is less than 250 years old and was created from day one with federalist and egalitarian notions in mind. Naturally, as a result, echoes of that centralization and authoritarianism persist in Europe and we will tend to have a greater level of 'nanny state syndrome' as a result, which will curb individual freedom for the greater good. Our more restrictive approach to freedom of speech in Europe, compared to the US, is a good example of this.

With regards to anything associated with sex and religion, the US is significantly more conservative however. Again this is historical; after all the colonies were originally populated by a bunch of puritanical cult members who would have made the Taliban look like hedonists, while our experience with countless religious wars has caused us to adopt a more cynical, secular outlook. This and the greater ease for new religions to flourish have naturally led to a significantly more conservative society with regards to religion and, by extension, sexuality.

Examples such as the American right to bare arms are a bit of a red herring, because while they appear liberal, they're actually conservative, in that they seek to conserve something that is historical, often even in the face of common sense.

Which is more conservative is arguable overall. Even throughout history, Western Europe has proved more conservative at times, yet the US on other occasions. Europe abolished slavery long before the US, yet the US embraced democracy long before Europe (note, while we had republics, these tended to be little more than oligarchies and not democracies as we would recognise them today), yet again much of Europe extended the right to vote to women before the US.

Where it comes to sexual matters though, Europe tends to be significantly more liberal. Homosexuality has been decriminalized in Western Europe for decades, with the last few states officially striking off laws criminalizing it no later than the early 1990's. By contrast, it remained criminalized in the US in all but one state until 1971 and it was only in 2003 that the final 14 states were forced to decriminalize it by their Supreme Court - ten years after the last Western European nation (Ireland) did so.

Cohabitation also follows this trend, in that the Western Europeans are significantly more likely to cohabit and have families without marriage - with most births now occurring outside of marriage in Slovenia, Norway, Sweden, France and, highest of all, Iceland (64.3%). Conversely, it is actually still technically illegal to cohabit outside of marriage in seven US states.

So broadly speaking, Western Europe is generally more liberal in terms of attitudes twoards sexuality, religion and relationships, yet the US is probably more liberal in terms of personal freedoms, such as free speech and the 'pursuit of happiness'.

Canvasser

Since when did politics become about nothing more than sex, gays and abortion? These are all just sides issues and distractions from the real economic problems.

Mannix1888

Canvasser wrote: »

Since when did politics become about nothing more than sex, gays and abortion? These are all just sides issues and distractions from the real economic problems.

I largely agree with this. Politicians can sideline economic concerns by talking around in circles about religion and general social issues. Abortion in particular is a debate that politicians can wax lyrical about for hours on end without ever really saying anything definitive.

As regards the op's question, the USA is a vast country with different attitudes towards social issues in different states. Difficult to ascertain if the USA is uniformaly more socially consevartive than western Europe, in some parts it is in others it isn't.

The Corinthian

Canvasser wrote: »

Since when did politics become about nothing more than sex, gays and abortion? These are all just sides issues and distractions from the real economic problems.

Possibly since, after five years of hearing little else than about economic problems, 'crisis fatigue' kicked in.

TBH, this thread specifically seeks to compare social attitudes between Europe and the US and there's no shortage of threads here addressing the "real economic problems". Perhaps you should read those instead.

poeticseraphim

The USA is one Hug country....Europe is a continent of many cultures. You cannot compare them. Even the US is diverse consider Arizona compared to New York. Consider Paris , Switerland and Hollande. In Amsterdam you have legalized drugs and prostitution. They have legalized brothels in Paris. Yet gun laws are loose in the US (although most consider that a conservative policy over there not a liberal one). But they are both conservative and liberal in different ways.


The US likes to portray itself as more conservative sometimes depending on who is talking. Las Vegas has liberal gambling laws.

It is not as simple as one being more or less conservative than the other.

Eggy Baby!

This really depends on where you are - I'm in New England and really don't find people to be all that pro war. They do of course support the troops out there, but in fairness, if Irish troops were out there you would wish their safe return whether you are pro war or not. The soldiers out there fighting are not the ones pushing war, that's the pencil pushers far behind the lines. So basically i guess I'm trying to say support for troops does not equate support for war. There is. Also the stark reality that cutting back t he military would result in a massive increase in unemployment levels.

I refer you to the drum beating that preceded the First Gulf War. Not only was it present in the media, but also, as a follow on from this, in the US public.

With regards to the bolded part, the military industrial complex is pretty big in the USA, so cutbacks would be detrimental for the funding of politicians. Not to mention the initial demob from cutting back the size of the military.

But good point about attitudes to the military being different from place to place; as somebody mentioned before, its not exactly a homogenous country.

avalon68

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

I refer you to the drum beating that preceded the First Gulf War. Not only was it present in the media, but also, as a follow on from this, in the US public.

I dont know really; just because those beating the drums make a lot of noise doesn't mean they have everyones support. The majority of people I work with are pro bringing troops home and investing in the economy, except for one guy.....but theres always one!

flyswatter

southsiderosie wrote: »

Sindri wrote: »

By socially conservative I'd imagine America is much more so. They have a definite historically established culture there that they idealize, and definite established social constructs/values. Being white, Christian, capitalist, a fixation on government and rights, freedom and a general insularity. Their political culture is also very heavily influenced by it and by the above.

The US is not alone in idealizing its own history. Also, given the decentralized structure of the state, it seems to me that there is actually less of a fixation on government than in Europe, where the government is much more present in peoples' lives on a daily basis.

Also, in what European country is being white and Christian not a part of 'established' culture? If it were not, Europeans would not be struggling as much as they are with immigration. The US may be majority white and Christian, but Americans are much more liberal when it comes to living in an multi-ethnic society and respecting religious difference than their European counterparts. Not to mention the fact that some states like California are already minority-majority.

I wouldn't say Europe overall regarding your point on multi ethnic society. You have the UK which is similarly diverse ethnically and religiously.

The Corinthian

flyswatter wrote: »

I wouldn't say Europe overall regarding your point on multi ethnic society. You have the UK which is similarly diverse ethnically and religiously.

Indeed. The same can said of Spain, France and Germany, amongst others. Germany, even more so than the UK, has the third-highest number of international migrants worldwide and boasts the fourth largest Turkish city in the World - Kreuzberg. If you look at the migrant population in the US and do a quick tot-up of those in Europe, the latter easily surpasses the former.

All before you consider religion, because even were the US to have more migrants (of whatever generation), they're still overwhelmingly Christian - Muslims make up only 0.8% of the US population, yet account for 6% of the European population. Where do you think that the term Eurabia came from?

So to suggest that Europe is somehow more ethnically homogeneous than the US is a bit ridiculous. Once upon a time, perhaps, but that's not been the case for quite a while.

mike65

Europe is as conservative and as liberal as you want "it" to be, just pick your subject and your location - hard line on abortion? Ireland, Poland. Porn coming out of your ears if you want it? Sweden, Spain, Greece and so on.

flyswatter

mike65 wrote: »

Europe is as conservative and as liberal as you want "it" to be, just pick your subject and your location - hard line on abortion? Ireland, Poland. Porn coming out of your ears if you want it? Sweden, Spain, Greece and so on.

Yes, I agree, as regards attitudes to sexuality you can see the difference. Look at the uproar after Janet Jacksons nipple at the Superbowl, whereas you could have a 12 certificate movie in France, Germany etc with lots of full frontal nudity and no hassle about it.

southsiderosie

The Corinthian wrote: »

Indeed. The same can said of Spain, France and Germany, amongst others. Germany, even more so than the UK, has the third-highest number of international migrants worldwide and boasts the fourth largest Turkish city in the World - Kreuzberg. If you look at the migrant population in the US and do a quick tot-up of those in Europe, the latter easily surpasses the former.

All before you consider religion, because even were the US to have more migrants (of whatever generation), they're still overwhelmingly Christian - Muslims make up only 0.8% of the US population, yet account for 6% of the European population. Where do you think that the term Eurabia came from?

So to suggest that Europe is somehow more ethnically homogeneous than the US is a bit ridiculous. Once upon a time, perhaps, but that's not been the case for quite a while.

flyswatter wrote: »

I wouldn't say Europe overall regarding your point on multi ethnic society. You have the UK which is similarly diverse ethnically and religiously.

But I didn't say that Europe was more homogeneous; on the contrary my point was that they are not, but they have a harder time dealing with that fact than the US does because being white and Christian was and is still part of their long-established culture. In the 1990s, Germany was still denying that they were a nation of immigrants, even though the percentage of their population that was foreign-born was comparable to the US. In addition, there is far more intergenerational mobility among immigrants in the US than in most European countries, and (non-athlete) minorities in general are a much more visible part of public life in the US, with perhaps the exception of the UK.

C14N

avalon68 wrote: »

The soldiers out there fighting are not the ones pushing war, that's the pencil pushers far behind the lines.

Maybe not but if it wasn't for so many young people signing up for the army along with the widely held attitude that joining the military and fighting in wars is a noble and admirable thing to do, there mightn't be so many of them. And I have never been in another country that is so willing to assist and praise those who are serving or have served in the military.

imitation

I think its fair to say liberal or conservative is a poor way to describe something than can range from health care policy to freedom of speech to immigration. I think a lot of it comes down to your own point of view, to me as a person who has had health difficulty in the past free healthcare is vital, so obviously I'm not too impressed by the american stance on healthcare.

For somebody living where emigration for better prospects is common then this is going to be the hot topic, but many of the uber socialist country's in Europe are actually pretty hung up on immigration, it takes up to 9 years to be nationalized in Denmark, as opposed to 5 in the US. I guess the US has good immigration PR from movies, while on the other hand I can imagine some of more outspoken party's stances on immigration will come across as bad PR.

The Corinthian

southsiderosie wrote: »

But I didn't say that Europe was more homogeneous; on the contrary my point was that they are not, but they have a harder time dealing with that fact than the US does because being white and Christian was and is still part of their long-established culture. In the 1990s, Germany was still denying that they were a nation of immigrants, even though the percentage of their population that was foreign-born was comparable to the US. In addition, there is far more intergenerational mobility among immigrants in the US than in most European countries, and (non-athlete) minorities in general are a much more visible part of public life in the US, with perhaps the exception of the UK.

That's a fair point. European identity is still largely rooted in ethnic origin, with far greater emphasis on integration into the host culture than the US, which is to a great extent seen as a melting-pot or ongoing work in progress. That most, if not all, European nations still base nationality largely on the principle of jus sanguinis would be another example of this.

Victor

The Browser wrote: »

Which is more socially conservative: The US or the EU?

My own thoughts and those of others can probably be summed up as 'the populations of both the US and EU occupy all of the social spectrum, it is not one size fits all'.

The question in the thread title is as unthinking as 'all Muslims are the same' - despite each group (Westerners and Muslims) each having a population of about a billion people.

avalon68

C14N wrote: »

Maybe not but if it wasn't for so many young people signing up for the army along with the widely held attitude that joining the military and fighting in wars is a noble and admirable thing to do, there mightn't be so many of them. And I have never been in another country that is so willing to assist and praise those who are serving or have served in the military.

For many of them it's the only way to afford getting a college education. During a summer j1 a good few years back I worked with a brother and sister who were both in some high school military program and were using the military to afford going on to college - One has since died in action. Noble, maybe; tragic, definitely. I would imagine if you looked at the stats for those in the military they would be skewed towards those from less well off backgrounds.

Einhard

southsiderosie wrote: »

In addition, there is far more intergenerational mobility among immigrants in the US than in most European countries, and (non-athlete) minorities in general are a much more visible part of public life in the US, with perhaps the exception of the UK.

While that's a interesting point, I think it's ignoring the fact that immigrant communities in Europe are a much more recent phenomenon that in the US. I don't think it's valid to compare the experiences of a black community resident in the US for generations with, say, an Algerian Muslim community living in Paris for a few decades. And that's not taking into account the fact that immigrants to America are far more religiously homogenous than those who enter Europe. Indeed, one might highlight someone like Bobby Jindal as an example of the American system at its most harmonious, yet that too would be to ignore that Jindal converted to Roman Catholicism in his 20s. Would he have risen to his current prominence had he ramined Hindu? Perhaps, but it illustrates the differences that exist between immigration to the US and Europe.

southsiderosie

Einhard wrote: »

While that's a interesting point, I think it's ignoring the fact that immigrant communities in Europe are a much more recent phenomenon that in the US. I don't think it's valid to compare the experiences of a black community resident in the US for generations with, say, an Algerian Muslim community living in Paris for a few decades. And that's not taking into account the fact that immigrants to America are far more religiously homogenous than those who enter Europe. Indeed, one might highlight someone like Bobby Jindal as an example of the American system at its most harmonious, yet that too would be to ignore that Jindal converted to Roman Catholicism in his 20s. Would he have risen to his current prominence had he ramined Hindu? Perhaps, but it illustrates the differences that exist between immigration to the US and Europe.

Blacks in the US aren't immigrants - most can trace their lineage back further than most American whites. Blacks from Africa and the Caribbean are a relatively new immigrant group (post-1960s, putting them on par with African migration to Europe).

It is also ironic that you cite Jindal's conversion to Catholicism as a positive factor in his rise to political power - it certainly would have been a negative in US national politics until the 1960s. Catholics in the US in the late 19th and early 20th century were viewed in much the same way as Muslims in Europe are viewed today: people whose religious beliefs would always be put ahead of their citizenship or loyalty to country, and who brought nothing but poverty and violence with them wherever they went. This was particularly the case for the Irish.

In historical comparative perspective, I don't think that Europe gets much of a pass for their response to immigration. Imagined communities can be re-imagined: even the Basques have managed to do it over the last century. The basic, fundamental problem when it comes to immigration in Europe - and in particular migration from the post-war period until the oil crisis and stagflation of the 70s - is that these countries wanted workers and got people, but didn't really wake up to this fact until a decade ago.

Einhard

southsiderosie wrote: »

Blacks in the US aren't immigrants - most can trace their lineage back further than most American whites. Blacks from Africa and the Caribbean are a relatively new immigrant group (post-1960s, putting them on par with African migration to Europe).

True, but your post cited minorities as well as immigrants.

It is also ironic that you cite Jindal's conversion to Catholicism as a positive
factor in his rise to political power - it certainly would have been a negative
in US national politics until the 1960s. Catholics in the US in the late 19th
and early 20th century were viewed in much the same way as Muslims in Europe are
viewed today: people whose religious beliefs would always be put ahead of their
citizenship or loyalty to country, and who brought nothing but poverty and
violence with them wherever they went. This was particularly the case for the
Irish.

Again, this is true, but Jindal converted to Catholicism in the 1990s, not the 1890s.

In historical comparative perspective, I don't think that Europe gets much of a
pass for their response to immigration. Imagined communities can be
re-imagined: even the Basques have managed to do it over the last century. The
basic, fundamental problem when it comes to immigration in Europe - and in
particular migration from the post-war period until the oil crisis and
stagflation of the 70s - is that these countries wanted workers and got people,
but didn't really wake up to this fact until a decade ago.

I'm not saying that Europe doesn't have a problem with integrating immigrants communities and minorites, just that one can't draw a direct analogy between Europe and America because the make-up of the immigrant communities in both over the past few decades has been very different.

Manic Moran

C14N wrote: »

Maybe not but if it wasn't for so many young people signing up for the army along with the widely held attitude that joining the military and fighting in wars is a noble and admirable thing to do, there mightn't be so many of them. And I have never been in another country that is so willing to assist and praise those who are serving or have served in the military.

Is there any country in Western Europe or North America which looks down upon its soldiers, or otherwise does not respect and support them? Even in Ireland, non-militaristic though the country's psyche may be, the people generally seems to treat their troops well enough and the DF seem to be well regarded (There are certainly many more applicants than there are places).

I mean, are you suggesting that what the Irish Army gets up to is not noble and admirable?

NRM

Nodin

...to be honest, the attitude to the army here for many years was reprehensible. They didn't end up with a representative body because things were a bed of roses.