Alienation
Here's an interesting link on The Rhine River (via instapundit). Basically the author states that the Europeans are unable to integrate Muslim immigrants because of the European racial and cultural identity complex.
I agree that's true, but I think the malaise goes deeper. The trouble with the kind of cultural seperatism mentioned here is that it manifests itself in economics too -- notice that it's always the nations most insecure about their culture and place in the world that are the first to cry protectionism in the face of free trade. This then slows the economy, creates high unemployment, and exacerbates the problem all over again. Pretty soon it becomes a vicious circle, like the one France has been stuck in for 20 years.
America, on the other hand, has a notion of nationalism far more abstract and general than simple race or religion -- wasn't always the case, of course, but it's increasingly becoming so. This means America doesn't feel its identity so easily threatened by anything, including trade and immigration, and so there's not the same impulse to slam on the brakes. Of course America's had its share of racial turmoil and urban riots, but for the most part, I think, these have been a part of the never-ending process of American change and reinvention. America's upheavals seem to actually change things, fundamentally, at least in parts. In France, the government is just clinging even more tightly to the policies that got it into such trouble in the first place -- like that old story about the skydiver who freezes in terror on the way down, and clings ever more tightly to the ripcord, thus preventing his buddy from pulling the ripcord and saving his life. Open societies don't freeze or cling. One day soon, France will have to thaw, before it hits the ground.
I agree that's true, but I think the malaise goes deeper. The trouble with the kind of cultural seperatism mentioned here is that it manifests itself in economics too -- notice that it's always the nations most insecure about their culture and place in the world that are the first to cry protectionism in the face of free trade. This then slows the economy, creates high unemployment, and exacerbates the problem all over again. Pretty soon it becomes a vicious circle, like the one France has been stuck in for 20 years.
America, on the other hand, has a notion of nationalism far more abstract and general than simple race or religion -- wasn't always the case, of course, but it's increasingly becoming so. This means America doesn't feel its identity so easily threatened by anything, including trade and immigration, and so there's not the same impulse to slam on the brakes. Of course America's had its share of racial turmoil and urban riots, but for the most part, I think, these have been a part of the never-ending process of American change and reinvention. America's upheavals seem to actually change things, fundamentally, at least in parts. In France, the government is just clinging even more tightly to the policies that got it into such trouble in the first place -- like that old story about the skydiver who freezes in terror on the way down, and clings ever more tightly to the ripcord, thus preventing his buddy from pulling the ripcord and saving his life. Open societies don't freeze or cling. One day soon, France will have to thaw, before it hits the ground.
5 Comments:
"America, on the other hand, has a notion of nationalism far more abstract and general than simple race or religion -- wasn't always the case, of course,"
I disagree. American identity has always been an ideological one. Even the pre-civil war identification with states instead of the Federal government was couched in terms of ideology.
Its all relative, of course, but America never did have a concept of national identity approaching the European concept of "blood and soil." As a nation we have always been to young, to mobile and to culturally diverse for such a notion to take hold.
I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with Shannon: sure, there are ideological components to the American identity, but they are not the race and religion Joel mentioned.
As for integrating races and immigrants, I think that a mix of US culture and institutions largely accomplish that. Music, comedy, sport, college life, all encourage familiarity: In the 1970's white people were laughing at "Sanford and Son" and "The Jeffersons", and I think stuff like that doesn't get enough credit -- we can laugh at perceived racial differences.
Many would-be racists have found themselves idolizing sports heroes of another race. And many veterans will tell you that they got over their childhood racism upon being forced together in the military. It's hard for a white guy to remain much of a racist when his roommate and new best friend is black, for example.
(Actually I do worry that Arab-Americans are not yet much contributing to these same things. Maybe that'll come in time.)
I think the abstract notion of nationalism that Joel might perceive is one based on our founding ideals -- freedom, liberty, democracy, pursuit of happiness. Also individual responsibility: we took charge of our destiny in the 1770s and that's part of our character.
No that eveyone lives up to those ideals, but outside of college faculty and left-wing echo chambers, people actually buy into those notions, and if you buy into them, you can be an American too.
Mike d,
I was disagreeing with the "wasn't always the case" part. American's identity as Americans has always been highly abstract especially when measured relative to other national identities of the same era.
It is a very important cultural attribute that divides us strongly from Europe. Europeans are struggling to create transnational governance that will allow them to escape the ethnic tribalism that has dogged them the last two hundred years or more. Americans long since escaped that trap by creating a national identity based on ideology and not ethnicity.
As a current resident in France I generally speaking agree with you. I've made a far longer comment at my blog though comparing your view with that of Alain Finkielkraut as reported in Ha'aretz
Hi guys
Shannon: I wasn't entirely clear -- I agree that the American ideal has always been grand, but I was refering to the difference between espousing a national ideology, and actually practising it in its entirety. In Australia, for example, we've always prided ourselves on being an egalitarian nation where anyone can get a fair deal if they're honest and hard working... much the same as America. Unfortunately, we've also had the 'White Australia Policy', the last of which was only dismantled in 1973, there's been appalling racism toward aboriginies, Italian immigrants were discriminated against, then the Asian immigrants after '73... etc. We're still not perfect, but we're much closer now to actually practising our original concept of egalitarianism than we were.
LIkewise America went through many struggles to extend the rights entailed in the constitution to all its people in practise. Those struggles were sometimes very traumatic, but as a result of them, I think America, like Australia, has come much closer to actually practising what the constitution preaches.
France, on the other hand, is finding it impossible to learn from its struggles, because any solution that challenges the present Statist system is automatically self-censored... and of course the Statist system is the biggest part of the problem. So France can't learn from its trials and upheavals like America has, because the debate isn't free and open. Until they're prepared to contemplate the unthinkable, it won't change.
I'll be fascinated to see what happens if (and when) Sarkozy wins in 2007. I know some libertarians here aren't sold on him, but... hell, it'll be interesting.
Post a Comment
<< Home