By common consent Europe is more liberal or progressive or left-wing than the United States. Europeans say it, Americans say it, and hardly anyone objects.
I object. By only the narrowest of criteria is Europe more liberal or progressive or left-wing than the United States. To my (future) sympathizers I present a defense of this position; may it serve you well in pub/bar/cafe debates with unconvinced Euro-philes. A disclaimer: I don’t mean to say the United States is more progressive or that it is “better” or that progressive is good. I merely suggest that we should not so blindly accept the argument that Europe is more progressive.
The most common “Europe is more progressive than America” argument goes something like this: “In Europe we have social welfare, secular government, gay marriage, and a humble foreign policy. In America you have guns, religion, capitalism, and imperialism. Thus we are more progressive.”
Why should we be suspicious of this argument? Consider these points/rhetorical questions:
[1] What does “progressive” or “liberal” or “left-wing” even mean? In the 1930s “progressive” in the United States meant prohibition (of alcohol), moralist legislation, and economic empowerment of the poor. Today it means something very different. “Liberal” implies free-market in Europe and the rest of the world but in the United States it refers to those of the tax and spend persuasion. And “left-wing” includes groups as diverse as social democrats, communists, and anarchists. Who knows what a “left-wing” policy agenda would look like? Thus our standard for evaluating this claim (of European progressiveness, or whatever) is already flawed. We hardly know what to evaluate.
[2] Europe isn’t Holland. Not every European is smoking marijuana during an interracial gay interfaith marriage at a vegan restaurant (nor are the Dutch, I suspect…). Italy has Silvio Berlusconi (who owns practically the entire Italian media), France has Nicolas Sarkozy, and Eastern Europe remains a bastion of social conservatism. Plus let’s not forget the rise of the far right in France (Jean Marie Le Pen), Austria (Jorg Haider), Belgium (Filip Dewinter), etc.
[3] The United States is remarkably liberal, even on domestic policies frequently ridiculed by Europeans. Consider gay marriage, which is legal in four European countries: Belgium, Norway, Netherlands, and Spain. Not a very impressive record for the supposedly more tolerant Europeans, especially given that gay marriage is legal in California and Massachusetts (and thus must be recognized in the other 48 states as required by the Constitution).
[4] Immigration. This is the big one, and Europe is miserably regressive on this issue. Consider the immigrant ghetto riots in Paris three years ago, or the burning of immigrant businesses and homes in El Ejido, Spain in 2000, or the total marginalization of Germany’s Turkish minority. Europeans love to joke about American rural rednecks who think Barack Obama is a Muslim or won’t vote for him because he’s black, but there’s absolutely zero chance of any European country electing the interracial son of a Kenyan immigrant to be President (or Prime Minister or Chancellor or whatever). Whereas the United States has made remarkable progress towards integrating its immigrant minorities (although terrible problems persist, such as the Minutemen or institutional racism or the North Carolina GOP), Europe has done pathetically little. Consider the racist chants during Spanish soccer games (Atlético Madrid, La Selección, etc.) compared against the non-issue of minority or immigrant athletes in the United States. The EU, celebrated as an example of transnational cooperation, appears more fortress than post-modern paradise when viewed from North Africa or the Middle East or elsewhere.
[5] Parts of neo-conservative foreign policy are actually quite liberal, progressive, and left-wing. Whereas Europeans celebrate very conservative notions of international governance (the inviolability of national sovereignty, for example), American neo-cons have (disastrously) embraced a more cosmopolitan perspective on international relations. Consider that in recent years Europeans have preferred a foreign policy of diplomacy and maintaining the balance of power (at least outside Europe) while Americans have preferred democratization and radical systemic change. Which seems more liberal/progressive/left-wing to you? Remember the Comintern as an example of aggressive left-wing foreign policy.
There’s undoubtedly more to say, but I’ll stop here. Please comment; this is such a popular and controversial topic of conversation and definitely merits a closer look.
Europe for sure isn’t the Netherlands… I myself live in the dutch-speaking part of Belgium (Flanders) and I have to say that the view that lives about Holland in the international media isn’t correct… Don’t understand me wrong: it is a liberal country but they are so many clichés.
If you say Eastern Europe is a bastion of social conservatism I have to say you are incorrect… In Europe a lot of people are secular and that also counts for Eastern and Central Europe: they had the horros of WOII and the not religious policies of the USSR.
And for the rise of the far right in Europe? Jorg Haider, who recently lost his life in a car accident, had a homosexual relationship. As for Philip De Winter in Belgium and his party ‘Vlaams Belang’: it lost more and more seats in the parliaments (during the citycounsil-elections in ‘06 and later on in ‘07 in the federal elections) and has a declining support in the national polls. And the Front National of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France even has no seats in the parliaments what so ever!
And if you consider gaymarriage: you are right if you say that only 4 European countries allow it, but there are only 6 worldwide! You also forget to say that in most EU-memberstates that don’t allow GM they have civilunions or registered partnerships that give gays in Europe more rights than in the most states of the US. Not less than 19 American states have absolutly no anti-discrimination laws for sexual orientation, and 9 more only have protection for state employment! This is absolutly unthinkable (even illegal) in the European Union!
And for immigration I have to say you are right if you say that the EU looks more and more on a Fortress… but that’s only perception: we always had bordercontrole but the last years it became more effective because it was made supra-national (meaning: it went for a large part to the European Union, though national memberstates have still a say in it).
I don’t like Sarkozy that much, he maybe isn’t interracial but he also is a son of an immigrant. In a lot of national governements there are interracial (a lot of them aren’t even interracial) ministers (France, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium,…) it just isn’t a big issue here.
And what do you say about the fact that Obama would have been elected with an enermous landslide in Europe?
And don’t be mistaken: we didn’t need marshes to Capitol Hill to give ‘those’ people rights.
Foreign Policy under the neo-cons? Radical systemic change?
I found your post very intresting, but the part on foreign policy is just ridicule!