I have been in the US about ten times and I think one of the initial barriers is our that our perception of the US is formed through Hollywood.
Some things that did not match my expectations/assumptions:
- The average American is much poorer than I expected. Wealth is less evenly divided, than say West-Europe.
- Americans are extremely nice and warm. Some Europeans say it is superficial, but I really liked when eating at some place that a stranger would pass by and have a chat.
- Apart from the West coast and North-East, Americans are pretty conservative.
- Americans have a positive attitude towards life.
- Americans are prepared to take risks, where Europeans are for more risk-averse. This (IMO) has a bad effect on the social system, but a positive effect on entrepreneurism.
Don't let appearances dictate your perception of wealth (well, in the midwest at least). A lot of farmers, business people in the midwest don't look the part, but have the bucks.
And as you might learn in 'The Millionaire Next Door' many doctors and lawyers have nothing but debt and the appearance of wealth. Or in Texan: "Big hat, no cattle."
I have been in the U.S. as often as you (like 20 times) and had the same experiences. I go with all your 5 points. I especially like their openness and friendliness. The very positive experiences changed the way I behave when meeting strangers outside of the U.S.
Things changed a bit after 9/11 though, but I can understand that.
"Be patient if Americans are ignorant of some aspect about your home country. Use the opportunity to educate and share, just do so in a polite and brief manner."
Citizens of other countries always like to point out how Americans are ignorant of other nations and their cultures, oftentimes failing to realize that within their own nation poverty is rampant and the majority of the population remains illiterate (yes, although I was born American my ethnic background comes from one of these such nations). Yet because of our standing in the world as a superpower, and because so many people from so many countries end up moving here - we are expected to be experts on the cultural sensitivities of all these countries.
Americans are more open and willing to learn, I find, than pretty much any people anywhere in the world.
My own "disappointment" is not with 'regular joe' Americans, but with educated Americans. Being from a large city in India, I know from personal experience that majority of the people with college education, especially technical education are knowledgeable about things outside their own country at least in a conversational level, if not they want to know more. I cannot assume the same with Americans. I felt astonished that people who have degrees from top technical universities have lop sided and often dated views of the rest of world.
Many time they are not even ready to acknowledge that things can and often are done better outside their own country. The sense of NIH is very strong.
We're special for a lot of reasons, including 'soft power' (e.g., the most watched movies in the world are from America), 'hard power' (our military is more powerful and more likely to be used than any other plausible combination of nations I can think of), and economic power (our GDP is on par with the entire European Union. It is significantly larger than Brazil, Russia, India, and China's combined).
For these reasons, most every educated person in the world knows more about America than almost any other country (excluding their own and a handful of neighbors). I don't understand why a citizen of country X is surprised that most Americans don't know much more about X, than they they themselves do about Country Y (where Y is roughly of equal importance as X, but is on the other side of the world).
I've met Brits who were insulted that I only know who their Prime Minister is and what the major parties are, while they are familiar with the intricacies of American politics (upcoming elections, controversies, major players in each party, etc). Yet, they almost always know absolutely nothing about Brazilian politics (while I also know Brazil's major parties and President). Why is it so difficult to understand that, to an American, British politics are about as important as Brazilian politics are to a Brit?
> For these reasons, most every educated person in the world knows more about America than almost any other country (excluding their own and a handful of neighbors)
At least in brazil people seem to know more about america than the rest of the country, specially in the richer and more educated regions in the south and southwest. Everyone I talk to is far more likely to know who is the president of the US or the governor of california than who is the governor of Piauí or the vice-president of brazil.
I think that "country X vs Y" stuff is much of why, when an American is ignorant about facets of another country/culture, they don't default to feeling like they are in some way at fault for that ignorance. That isn't the same thing as being proud of their ignorance (which is around in America, but much less common than one might fear), it is a reasonable position to have.
Any time spent learning about the details of some other culture/country is time not spent on learning about another. Faced with the abundance of sets of details to learn, and with little to make one country/culture's set of details stand out as the one an American might want to learn, lack of self-recrimination is a pretty healthy response. Maybe it would seem more polite if American's made like they were embarrassed about the ignorance when it comes up, but that would go against being honest.
My point is that Indians (for example) aren't embarrassed by their ignorance about Brazil (for example), but expect Americans to be embarrassed by their ignorance of India.
Speaking as an American who has spent time in Mexico, Spain and Ireland, and has traveled to southeast Asia: yes, Americans do sometimes have an arrogant view of the world.
On the other hand, knowing about other countries doesn't come as naturally here. If you live in Europe, you can take an overnight train ride to any one of a dozen countries, with whom you share a currency and often a closely-related language. An extreme example is Andorra, nested between Spain and France, where even before the Euro, they were too small to bother having their own currency, and natives basically can't get by without speaking French, Spain and Catalan, at a minimum.
Contrast that with someone who lives in Iowa. You can drive for days in any direction and not leave the US. You live in a huge country with lots of geographical and cultural variety. Your country is wealthy enough that you'd never go abroad for your job or education unless you were explicitly trying to see the world. Learning another language is wonderful and enriching, but there's no real economic reason to. And there's no doubt in your mind that your country is safe from foreign powers.
I'm not saying "let's all be ignorant of other people," but for many Americans, awareness of other countries is like a gold star of educational achievement, not an everyday necessity. I was eager to expand my horizons, but for many people that's just not on their priority list.
And besides, some people are just not curious about anything.
I think a lot of the beef with "typical Americans" is with your last type. If you get off the coasts you can find a whole bunch of Americans who are seemingly proud of not knowing anything about the rest of the world.
Not surprising when you consider that most people came here to get away from something, (poverty, repression, etc.) For no small number of Americans, the rest of the world is a proxy for "that place my ancestors left because it sucked ".
The US was isolationist before it got dragged into the world wars, and has become interventionist not because it's interested in conquest, but because the past century has taught it to fear what happens when it's not.
Well, in my experience at least, the people I'm griping about are pretty far from "off the boat". They see themselves as natives, and their ancestors left europe 150 years ago because it was a totally different place then. Not much to do with their current viewpoint on, say, Brazil or China.
The idea I was trying to express is about 3rd, 4th, etc. generation immigrants. By that time, the information the trickles down in your family lore boils down to "it sucked, we left, good riddance". I think the combination of "we left, we kept getting dragged back to fight wars, and we ended up on top" (grossly over-simplified), leads to a unique and odd "background vibe" to the culture, which seems more pronounced in long-term 'natives'. I think people who are more recent are more cognizant of the subtleties that exist.
My father's side of the family came to America about 100 years ago from Sweden. They settled in North Dakota, one of the dreaded "flyover states". My great-grandfather apparently didn't tell his children anything about the home country, nor did he teach them Swedish. He wanted them to focus on being Americans, rather than trying to be Swedish. These days, we eat lutefisk on Christmas Eve and that's about it.
You know how people fight over things that happened hundreds of years ago? Its like that. When people who have been here for 100+ years hear about "family history" it often involves stories of say the potato famine in Ireland. While intellectually they understand Ireland is no longer like that (indeed they may even have visited it to get in touch with there roots). Emotionally they have a lasting impression of a America being the promised land. Their ancestors fled elsewhere to come here, thus here must be the best.
The main and important exception to this is of course African American's.
> If you get off the coasts you can find a whole bunch of Americans
No, actually you won't. Most of America's population lives within two hundred miles of it's coastlines. This group of proudly ignorant people is therefore much smaller than they're stereotypically thought of being.
Having driven from Richmond, Virginia, to Anchorage, Alaska, twice, I can first-hand confirm that there is a LOT of empty land in the heart of North America.
It is because of these trips that I no longer worry about global overpopulation and just look at people quizzically when they start talking about the topic.
I grew up in North Dakota and haven't found anyone who was "proud" of not knowing about the rest of the world. In a lot of circles it is a point of pride to know a whole lot about where your ancestors came from. I find the generalization particularly insulting and mostly untrue.
I don't know where in India you are, but I've spent 2 months there and have encountered my share of educated Indians who, for example, didn't know where or what Austria is or that Israel has a lot of Jewish people in it (or even what Jews are). Another example off the top of my head was an educated engineer (who went to graduate school) who didn't know what the Roman Empire was.
All of these examples or equivalents never manifested themselves when I was in the US.
Many (upper class) Indians are extremely ignorant about the world outside of India.
India is a bit like America in the fact that it is huge and multicultural, and you do not need to leave in order to travel, in my experience.
(incidentally, from Ireland, I must admit I had met and drank beer with several Israelis years before I knew anything about the whole Jewish thing. It's pretty easy to ignore history & geography when you are younger.)
I know about Austria (and it's infamous son), Israel and it's formative years and it's current influence on my country and middle east. Also, as a South Indian, I know that Jews have lived in my part of the country for nearly two thousand years. Of course, I may be atypical.
My point is that I'm yet to meet atypical people like myself in US even in handfuls after three years of living here and travelling to many big cities.
It might be helpful to remember that historically, most people who came to America as a chance to start over and leave the past behind. People who were doing well usually didn't migrate to the US. In my family, the men's of "We were kicked around until we came here, then we did well," is very strong. So much so, that I'm the first one to travel internationally, except for military service.
Most of the recent immigrants to US from India are "economic" immigrants who have no bones with their motherland. They just came to a place with more headroom.
So, a lot of Indians are not eager to get rid of their cultural identities as fast as many European immigrants.
Many time they are not even ready to acknowledge that things can and often are done better outside their own country. The sense of NIH is very strong.
I agree with this, but I haven't actually been to a country that wasn't like that. Certainly here in Denmark, many Danes are quite certain that Denmark is run better than any other place. ;-)
I am Danish but "left" the country 7-8 years ago. The last few months I've been back to prepare for my move to the US, which will be my second time living and working there. It's remarkable how absurd the Danish world-view appears to me now after living abroad in several very different cultures. The social welfare system is more attractive than ever, but the provincialism, the we-are-the-best attitude, and the subtle and overt xenophobia is staggering. One thing I realized with some sadness on this most recent stay is that I doubt I will ever able to move back, if only because the woman I plan to marry would be treated as a second-rate human being.
I'm American but grew up in the Canal Zone. I've been in Germany a lot the past two years. My girlfriend is German and lives in Berlin. My impression is that Germans really do believe they are the best. They will never say so publicly but deep down they really believe it.
My girlfriend's dad joked about Americans and hamburgers. I offered to make him one since he'd never had one. He emphatically said no. I'm a picky eater and hate cabbage. I politely declined to try some of his dishes because of the cabbage thing. He asked if Americans were always unwilling to try new things. I pointed out that he wouldn't try a hamburger and he got upset. He didn't see it as hypocritical. (It didn't bother me that he didn't want to try one. I don't care what people are or aren't willing to eat.)
There were other things and then it dawned on me. He really thinks his was is the best and can't understand how someone would think differently. He was in the Wehrmacht and his attitudes gave me a creepy feeling.
I know this is anecdotal but I've gotten this impression from many Germans of different ages. Germans think they are better. It cracks me up when I hear Germans talking about American arrogance.
You might enjoy Whit Stillman's movie Barcelona which is partly about inter-cultural romance, as well as the cultural role of hamburgers. After mocking McDonald's and hamburgers while dating in Barcelona, in the final scene of the movie, they enjoy a real burger from the grill and decide it's pretty good after all:
Did it occur to your girlfriend's Dad that the name "Hamburger" might indicate something about the origin of the dish? I wonder if that would impact his interest in trying it.
Yeah, he's a WW II vet. My dad passed away in December and he was a WW II vet. My dad fought the Germans and he never said a bad word about Germans or Germany. None that I ever heard. My girlfriend's dad? I've heard plenty from him about Americans (in a negative sense).
My girlfriend's dad fought on the Eastern front and he tells stories about how uncivilized the Soviets were. He doesn't say the word but it sort of hangs in the air unspoken; untermensch. He was also in the Auschwitz area for a while as a guard. It's tough being around him and I avoid it as much as I can. It's very uncomfortable.
No, he doesn't seem to mind me. He does have his prejudices with regard to America. (The amis is the derogatory German term.)
Two months ago I had lunch with him, another former Wehrmacht soldier and three women from that generation. The other guy was extremely rude. He said many derogatory things about Americans and American prisoner of war camp guards (my dad was such a guard after the war). I don't speak German and didn't know about this until after the dinner when my girlfriend interpreted for me.
I was pissed at her for not letting me know what he said until after he left. She didn't want a scene to be caused. No one in the group said anything to the man or to correct him or to say that he was full of shit. They all kept cheerfully engaged in conversation.
What's amazing to me is that the great crime of that generation was silence. Few spoke out against racist talk. Few stood up against foolish rantings. Sixty years later here was a group of Germans from that generation still afraid to speak up. Still afraid of causing a scene (and my girlfriend too!).
It was absolutely shocking. I was really pissed because my dad had died a few weeks earlier and it was hard to hear this stuff from the likes of these people. No Wehrmacht soldier has the right to call another uncivilized and he did call Americans uncivilized.
The whole thing caused me to reflect a lot. It's something I'll never forget. My girlfriend's generation suffers from what I call "the German guilt thing". Her father's generation doesn't seem to have ever come to grips with what they did.
This is all anecdotal of course. But in my dealings with other Germans it's clear to me that Germans on a whole do think they are better (or their way of life is better) than anyone else. They won't say this anymore but deep down there appears to be an "uber alles" bent.
Other people have different experiences and come to different conclusions than me. This is all just my opinion. I guess the crux of what I'm saying is that it is easy to feel superior and such arrogance isn't limited to Americans. There are lots of examples in the history of the world of such thinking. It's bad whenever it occurs and the worst form of it is to ignore it in your culture while condemning it in other cultures.
You might have a thin skin. Old soldiers (and old people in general) say outrageous things all the time. My grandpa is also a ww2 vet and busts out new offensive material every time I visit. Even the hyper educated oldsters do it. 8 years ago I went to a lecture by James Watson and he spent the whole 45 minutes making racist jokes about Asian people...
Your last sentence seems to imply that I do have a thin skin. It's possible. It's also possible that the generation of Germans that brought us Auschwitz is a disconcerting one to me and justifiably so.
Would you have lunch with Rudolf Hoss and be pleasant to him? What about a guard there? Perhaps the discomfort in me has to do with the fact that so many Germans committed atrocities and my conclusion is that I am no better. That is, in the same situation I would have done the same thing.
I could have a thin skin. By the way, my experience with men who saw combat - real combat - don't talk about it. The will tell a few anecdotes but nothing to do with combat. The ones who talk about their war experiences usually aren't the ones who actually did any fighting.
Please don't portray your girlfriend's dad's attitude as the attitude of the entire German population! No offense, but the way you're talking paints a very negative picture of some 80 million people. I realize this is obvious to everyone reading this, but it still leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
Yes, thank you, I know who the Wehrmacht were. I paid attention in history class.
More so I'm just surprised when I run across any veteran of WWII. FYI, no you don't run across WWII vets "all the time." Most of them are in their eighties or nineties at this point, and there aren't too many people of that age, let alone specifically WWII vets.
Mainly I was just surprised by a very random piece of information. You certainly don't hear about the German veterans of WWII in America all that much. I hope you're bright enough to figure out why.
Here, it is not at all uncommon to hear that somebodies grandfather is or was a vet. There were something like 15 million of them just from the US as I recall. For someone a decade or two older than myself (he says it was her father, not grandfather, so you can get a good guess at their ages...), encountering veterans would be only that much more common.
"You certainly don't hear about the German veterans of WWII in America all that much."
"My girlfriend is German and lives in Berlin."
I am under the strong impression that her father lives in Germany....
EDIT: Furthermore: "The total number of soldiers who served in the Wehrmacht during its existence from 1935-1945 is believed to have approached 18.2 million." With numbers like that, this hardly seems like such a particularly odd occurrance.
Well, one thing that is odd is that I'm under 40. I didn't mention this though. But I did grow up in the Canal Zone and have a colonial/imperial perspective on the issue of national arrogance.
Hearing that someone's grandfather was a vet is quite common, yes. And the number is 16 million. That said, most of them are dead now. So these days, for someone like myself - barely thirty - it is, in fact, quite uncommon to run across a living WWII veteran. I never have, and neither has anyone I know. I assume things are different for people in older generations. In other news, the sky is blue.
And yes, I am well aware that the father mentioned lived in Germany. Not only did I pay attention in history class, I can also read.
I was asking someone else a question about their story, and you respond by acting like I've grown a second head for being curious, and giving me a definition of a basic term related to the discussion.
> I agree with this, but I haven't actually been to a country that wasn't like that. Certainly here in Denmark, many Danes are quite certain that Denmark is run better than any other place. ;-)
You should visit the third world more often. At least here in Brazil many people believe everything is run by incompetent crooks and if they could just get out to foreign countries they would see what actual management and order are. (this is only partially true, specially as the country seems to be quickly decrooking in many levels)
Hmm, true, especially as far as opinions about governments go. Even in Europe, most of my Greek relatives have views like that on the quality of their government (moreso lately, for obvious reasons). But they do still have rather strongly positive views on how Greek culture stacks up. The consensus seems to be that Greek government is incompetent, but the Greek people and their culture are the world's best.
Well, you certainly don't sound very open to me. No one expects you to be experts. It's just that some Americans regard America as the central of the universe and never bother to learn about the most basic facts about "the rest of the world".
Many immigrants complain about the ignorance because some americans have ridiculous ,false or outdated stereotypical information about their countries. It's no doubt that America has the most intelligent people in the world but it is also not too hard to find a lot of arrogant and dumb people (maybe including you?).
So just because they are from a mostly poor and illiterate country, and let's say if some americans assume they are hardcore communists if they are from china or they are terrorists if they are from a muslim country or that all indians smell curry, they don't have a right to be disappointed? What does it have to do with their poverty and all?
I know you parents might fight and work very hard to escape their poor nation and come to america in order to give you a good life. Well,you are "American" now and seem to have totally forgotten your root. But at least have some respect. Don't be too arrogant.
I think a lot of this has to do with the cultural starting point in the U.S. The idea of American exceptionalism is quite common amongst the political punditry. Say something often enough and it begins to get believed.
There was a time when it was common amongst the Chinese intellectual class to think China was the best. In the 1400's Chinese emperors acquired a very anti-foreign attitude and Chinese exploration declined rapidly. Roman citizens thought Roman civilization was the best. My point is, imperial arrogance is common.
Personally I've always found it annoying when my countrymen are taken to task for being 'ignorant' of another country's culture. As I have to constantly point out to people from other countries - you're aware of so much in American politics because, like it or not, we're a (if not the) world super power right now. There's one (or a handful) of us, and hundreds of other countries. I can't be expected to be conversant in the politics and culture of all of them and still live my life. If someone insists on pressing the point, then I just pick a random country off the top of my head and ask them how much they know about it's culture and politics.
Usually that gets the point across. I also like to flip it around and point out to them that we're a nation of 300 million people, more divided and complex than they usually realize - and I almost never have a problem getting that point across pretty quickly. Most people from other countries who think they know a lot about America don't know as much about us as they think they do.
It's not that Americans don't want to learn about other countries - far from it. It's just that there are hundreds of them paying attention to us, and as citizens, we just can't individually return the favor and learn the ins and outs of all of them.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that there's noone on earth who grew up in one country, moved to another one, and managed to completely forget about salient facts like the poverty level in their original country.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you maybe don't know that many people from overseas.
My Iranian ex girlfriend often liked to point out how Americans are ignorant of other nations and their cultures. Her most common criticism is that Americans didn't know a lot about the occupation of Palestine.
Strangely, she seemed more or less unaware of Iran and Iraq's occupation of Kurdistan, and was only peripherally aware of Iran's occupation of Baluchistan [1].
I've similarly met South Americans, and even one Indian (!), who made serious comparisons between US poverty and true poverty. You can only make a comparison like that if you forget what true poverty really is.
[1] This was only by chance - her uncle got sent there as part of his term of forced labor in the army.
Careful, that limb might be thin. I live in NYC, remember? Just looked around my immediate office, there are 4 people from 3 different countries within 10 feet of me. (well, one of them's out today, so 3 from 2 countries unless we expand that radius to 30 feet, but you know). They all know the difference between 1st and 3rd world.
Most Americans do have quite a slanted and often factually incorrect view on the situation in Palestine (been there, seen the wall, the checkpoints, the very blatant racism and the total lack of opportunity). Not to say that the typical Iranian is likely much more enlightened on the subject, but someone else being dumb doesn't make you smarter. (also, on your tu quoque in regards to Iran, there's not a lot to defend about that country but at least they give equal legal status to all people within their borders, kurdish or baluchi).
Any viewpoint that starts off with "Americans are so much more enlightened than any other nationality" is probably an extremely unenlightened view, is all I'm saying. The chinese guy upthread got it better than I did.
Any viewpoint that starts off with "Americans are so much more enlightened than any other nationality" is probably an extremely unenlightened view, is all I'm saying.
I'm not taking this view at all. I'm just pointing out that while the direction of ignorance varies widely, the magnitude varies less.
People are lazy, and ignorance is the result of laziness. I don't think the US is particularly exceptional in this regard.
"(also, on your tu quoque in regards to Iran, there's not a lot to defend about that country but at least they give equal legal status to all people within their borders, kurdish or baluch"
Try being Baha'i in Iran. I know several refugees from Iran who would vehemently disagree with your statement.
Baha'i's a religious status, not an ethnic status. Not that I'm defending religious discrimination or anything, but that's orthogonal to the point I was making about treatment of occupied ethnic substates. Points taken that discrimination exists everywhere, is officially sanctioned many places, and certainly that the islamic republic isn't the model state.
People tend to forge their identities when they feel inadequate about their past. As an immigrant privy to no Americans present get-togethers, I see it all the time. The same people who lump all Southerners or Midwesterners into a overweight, bible thumping yokel stereotype, will froth at the mouth about Americans' ignorance of latest political discourse in their small corner of the world. People from predominantly white countries will claim that the US is less cultured because there is too much brown immigration. People who didn't have toilet paper back home will talk about the lack of museums. And so on and so forth.
My personal observation is, the majority tend to forget all the bad and remember all the good about their former home, and conversely, pick out all the bad and none of the good of their new home. It may be hard for you to believe because you are a rationalist, but it's very common.
It is surprisingly easy to forget about poverty if you live shielded from it. You see a lot of this in brazillian urban upper-middle class, specially in the south.
The patients of foreigner isn't tested by what Americans don't know about their home country, it's tested by what Americans think they about foreigner's home country.
One thing I've heard from several Europeans I've met (who are currently living in the US, either for work or school) is that Americans have a reputation for being very friendly but making a lot of empty social promises.
One European I met at my local watering hole was a programmer and a very cool guy, so we made plans to get together for beers and nerd talk. He mentioned the whole thing about social promises and said that he's had tons of cases where an American would express an intention to hang out at some later date and then flake out.
I insisted that I totally intended to call him up the following weekend and set something up, but of course I totally forgot, and by the time I remembered it had been an awkward amount of time, so I never did call.
My Singaporean roommate complains about this very thing. He thinks it's a politeness thing, as in, Americans will say "Let's do this again sometime," to sound polite, even when they have no intention of doing so.
I know that I totally intend on following up, but starting up new friendships often seems like a lot of work. Most of my friendships come from work, friends of friends, or other regulars at the bar my friends and I all go to. It seems like less of a risk after you randomly socialize with them a few times.
Germany is the only place I've ever lived where a couple will sit in their car outside their friends house for 10 minutes (having arrived 10 minutes early, of course) in order to be precisely on time.
As I recall, we'd consistently horrify them with our American-ness by walking out to their car to invite them in early.
America isn't the most punctual culture, but there are plenty of cultures that are much more casual about lateness, including some Middle Eastern, South American, and African cultures. Most Americans brush off as much as 15 minutes of tardiness, but in some cultures, 30-60 minutes isn't uncommon. The German student who consistently shows up a few minutes early may be annoyed that fellow students show up a few minutes late, but a South American student who shows up 45 minutes late is going to be immediately branded as lazy or unserious.
At least here in brazil, where punctuality is generally disregarded, classes start on time (at most 5min tolerance) and people arriving 45min late to a scheduled appointment shouldn't expect to find anything waiting for them.
At the same time, social events in general happen always an hour or so later than announced, except for small gatherings and things with a fixed timeframe such as going to the movies. As a naturally punctual person I've arrived in birthday parties thinking I was being fashionably late and found everybody still pre-shower and the place a mess.
There are even sub-sub-culture examples. Rovers (http://www.rovers.com.au/) for instance have RAT: Rover Adjusted Time, which is approximately "the next x.30 to occur after the start time" and which is compensated for by the "car park meeting" that occurs after the event is over.
It wouldn't be notable except for HOW often they both occur in a pair.
All of your examples are Germanic cultures. Notably, I think this is true in the German speaking part of Switzerland, but not nearly as much in Suisse Romande.
Really? Huh. I guess. Being someone with ADD I've stopped stressing about being consistently 5 minutes late, but I guess you're right, people are/were disproportionately upset with it until they've come to know me for a while and know I'm often like this.
Although sometimes it backfires and they get more annoyed because "Can't you fix that if you know it happens every time?"
No, you fuckwit, if I could reliably fix it I would have. It's not for lack of trying, so back the fuck off!
Swiss, as others have said. My cousins picked me up at the train station in Interlaken, having driven there from Berne. I saw them drive into the parking lot up the street. Counting the time it took them to walk from the parking lot to the train station entrance, they arrived within 60 seconds of the agreed-upon time.
Not to mention the clockwork nature of their transportation system... And the Alps... gah, what I am doing sitting at this desk?
I'm not sure it is "untrue" (in the sense that Americans do not place considerable value on punctuality), unless Austrian society is significantly different than German in that matter - in my experience the emphasis on punctuality is about the same in both cultures.
How about American irony and sarcasm? Here in Asia sarcasm is almost non-existent.
Also, Americans value humor as a way of showing affection for someone. Whereas in Asia displays of servitude are a sign of affection. For example, if I engage in a humorous conversation with you, that means I like you. Even if I don't pour your tea for you!
It really depends on where you are. America's states are analogous to European countries, albeit with a common language. The cultures are very, very different.
Indeed, but Britain is probably the other extreme. I believe there is only one country that could've produced magnificent material such as Monty Python or Fawlty Towers ;).
But what country could have produced "Airplane!", or "O Brother Where Art Thou?"
You could say that something like "Seinfeld" (and "Curb Your Enthusiasm") is more the product of a very unusual subculture (in fact, this is the basis for much of the humor, how poorly new yorkers fit in the rest of US culture), but keep in mind Seinfeld had the highest ratings of any sitcom in US history, so the appeal is obviously very broad.
To be clear I wasn't talking about humor in media - of which there are a lot of excellent examples, but the amount of humor that seems to be part of day to day life.
Incidentally, I wouldn't regard Monty Python as being very representative of "natural" British humor - I'd probably suggest Al Murray in his "Pub Landlord" persona to be far more like the comedy you are likely to encounter in real life (or Frankie Boyle for us Scots).
The main body of the news report tends to use the renarrative correctly - but sometimes, again, it is intentionally avoided. (...) This is because, due to its ambiguity, the renarrative in such cases could be perceived as a passing of judgement or expression of doubt by the reporter...
It really shows up in British vs American versions of "The Office" television show. The American boss is more likeable than Ricky Gervais, and the show's tone is cheerier.
I think that's also because the American show was intended to last longer. Ricky Gervais' character was truly repellent, and probably wouldn't have been tolerable for 7 seasons.
I've noticed people from the Indian subcontinent tend to be a lot more sarcastic than Americans. I wonder if it is a relic of the British colonization.
At the height of British occupation , there were not more than 1700(!) British people at the same time on the Indian subcontinent. Which itself is a fantastic testament to the British Raj's bureaucratic machinery. The English education was an instrument in creating that machinery.
A shorter version would be: Americans are generally individualist Protestant technologist capitalists. Like any other culture these defining traits bring inherent strengths, and unavoidable weaknesses.
On a different note, Does anyone know the author of this essay? I've seen it around at least as far back as the early 1990's, and it's good to see it still in use.
Take any one of those four traits and consider its opposite, e.g. individualism vs. group/tribal orientation. Individualism confers strengths most Westerners know and prize: freedom of expression, of employment, some degree of class/social/geographical mobility, personal merit and meritocratic ideals, etc. Individualism also brings severe and frequently self-destructive liabilities/weaknesses: alienation, lack of trust, lack of social bonds and support networks - as evidenced by the high rates of broken families, mental illness (depression, anxiety), and substance abuse.
Of course, a combination of traits brings strengths that are more than the sum of their parts, and concomitant weaknesses. For example, the US is a great market for consumer goods (and thus entrepreneurs), as individuals seek their own immediate gratification and the promise of salvation/transformation through buying something new - all while supposedly contributing to the greater economic welfare (there being few if any other widespread, concrete, social goals). But it is far from a given that this way of life is at all viable, even in the course of one human lifetime, never mind a few centuries. As some scholars put it, every society confronts (and creates) large collective problems; the US has consistently chosen individualist capitalist technologist solutions, and it remains to be seen whether that approach has a long-term future.
Even as an American, I still love to read about others' views of America. A little narcissistic, maybe, but I think it's more like getting another pair of eyes on something you look at everyday.
It took centuries to come to the point of introspection - anthropologists apparently label the normal American kinship system as Inuit or some such, because it wasn't until studying another culture that we recognized our own.
Other cultures are often evaluated as better or worse than this one rather than simply being seen as different.
True.
Americans tend to think that theirs is the best way to do things
Not true. Just think about American adoption of yoga and buddhism. Certain aspects of Asian cultures, once discovered, were adopted and adapted by Yanks who thought their culture could use improving.
Americans usually think of nature as something that can be altered, conquered, and controlled for people's comfort and use and in order to minimize the effects of fierce weather conditions. In contrast, many cultures accept nature as something they can change or control.
I don't think it's necessarily wrong, but the first sentence splits a list of 3 use cases into 2 + 1... It should say, "comfort, use, and to minimize..."
I'm sure this is great for immigrants , but it's just as useful for Americans, like myself living abroad. Before living overseas, I only understood a few vague general distinctions. Knowing your own peculiarities is a good starting point for adaptation.
There's also a link from the page on 'Cultural Adaptation' with great content for anyone interfacing with a second culture.
This seems a bit more accurate for New Yorkers than as a primer for Americans in general. "Observe their focus on themselves, rather on than their families" was particularly a "bwuh?" for me. In a university area (my local one is definitely like that), sure, but not in general.
By Asian standards, particularly Chinese, Americans are outrageously selfish. But it's true that Europeans (and perhaps most cultures) would find nothing unusual in Americans' value of self vs. family.
Yhea, I kind of balked at that as well. I think it would be more accurate to say that Americans just don't use their families as a topic of discussion - to us, family is very important, but it's a private affair. Family is something we only discuss with family, or very close friends.
Oh, and one more item for those college students who become grad students and decide they need to do field study, if you come out to a reservation in the northern plains and decide to hold a noon meeting, then YOU are on the hook for catering lunch. If you don't, prepare for a seriously insulted crowd. This includes dinner time meetings also. Brown bagging is not acceptable.
> Americans are taught that "all men are created equal." While they continually violate that idea in some aspects of life, in others they adhere to it.
More accurately, Americans mostly adhere to the notion that "all men are equal" when it serves the interests of the top 1%. Voting, the military, taxes, college admissions, etc.
Americans mostly adhere to the notion that "all men are equal" when it serves the interests of the top 1%....taxes...
Really bad example. The US has the most progressive tax system of the entire OECD. The only countries that come close are Australia, Ireland and the Netherlands.
I'm not sure why you believe the military gives preferences to the top 1%. As far as I'm aware, the military is strictly egalitarian (being based on fairly rigid performance criteria) with the sole exception of having racial and sexual preferences.
"I'm not sure why you believe the military gives preferences to the top 1%. As far as I'm aware, the military is strictly egalitarian..."
And that egalitarianism is partly used to hide the fact that the people dying, losing limbs, suffering traumatic brain injuries, etc., aren't the ones who are making billions of dollars from the war.
I'm not so cynical. Voting is supposed to be available to all; the military is a valued opportunity for many young folks with limited means; taxes are sometimes regressive but do follow a curve; rural youth in my area are admitted to colleges by merit.
> Fields and professions that were unwelcoming to women in the past have seen remarkable growth of women in their ranks, including areas such as medicine, police, law, and engineering.
(I'm American and) I'm most curious about the supposed "superficiality" of Americans, particularly w/respect to friendships. Can anyone enlighten me on the reason for this? Are people of other countries accustomed to dealing with people who are less mobile and more likely to stick around for a while, and therefore more willing to invest time in a relationship? Is it an overemphasis on an appearance of independence?
In my experience, Germans are more likely to retain friends from secondary school, more likely to date someone for longer, and more likely to keep a social appointment.
I would describe Germans as "slower to warm" to someone, but they "stay warm" for longer.
... And If you see Americans in the wild, make sure to stop what you're doing immediately, turn, and walk calmly, don't run, it will only excite them. If you have some food or drink, drop it, it may distract them, and in turn give you a few extra valuable seconds to escape ...
I suppose it's technically correct, but it doesn't sound good at all. Especially since they already just used 'Americans' in the title. "People of the United States" or something like that also reads better.
Sure, citizens of other countries in the Americas could also be called Americans, but in reality, if you're trying to actually communicate clearly with other people, rather than score political correctness points, you would not use that term for, say, a Canadian or a Brazilian, because there are already perfectly good, more specific terms for citizens of said countries.
Likewise, if you were really trying to talk about the commonalities of everyone from Alaskans to Argentinians you'd presumably use something like "peoples of the Americas".
I was about to lament that English lacks a short, euphonic, idiomatic word for "US-icans" / US citizens & residents / culturally US people / estadounidenses.
The proportion of "US Americans" who would self-describe as a "Yank" must be vanishingly small. I think the first rule about names is that the named person should recognize the results.
From my experience, there has never been any confusion about which country I am from when I tell a non US citizen that I am "American". I have also never, in actual conversation, heard somebody refer to the totality of western hemisphere landmasses as "America". It is always either North America or South America. The only exception I can think of in that regard is when discussing "The Americas" from the perspective of 15th and 16th century European exploration.
Some things that did not match my expectations/assumptions:
- The average American is much poorer than I expected. Wealth is less evenly divided, than say West-Europe.
- Americans are extremely nice and warm. Some Europeans say it is superficial, but I really liked when eating at some place that a stranger would pass by and have a chat.
- Apart from the West coast and North-East, Americans are pretty conservative.
- Americans have a positive attitude towards life.
- Americans are prepared to take risks, where Europeans are for more risk-averse. This (IMO) has a bad effect on the social system, but a positive effect on entrepreneurism.