Since the arrival of President Barack Obama in the White House, there has been an undeniable rapprochement between Europe and the US. But on the deeper and more fundamental level of emotions and values, is it possible that the gap between the two sides of the Atlantic has widened?
Today, there is much more collective hope and much more individual fear in the US in the wake of the global economic crisis. But the reverse is true in Europe. Here one encounters less collective hope and less individual fear. The reason for this contrast is simple: the US has Obama, and Europe has the welfare state.
So what can be done to promote an “Americanization” of Europe in political terms and a “Europeanization” of the US in social terms? Comforted by a new president who incarnates a return of hope, who inspires and reassures at the same time, Americans are starting to believe that the worst of the economic crisis is behind them.
What was at the beginning of this spring no more than “a glimmer of hope,” to use Obama’s phrase, has become a more serious and positive trend. Animated collectively by a combination of natural optimism and deep nationalism, Americans have made their president’s campaign slogan “Yes, we can” their own.
By contrast, when the personal situations of many individual Americans are examined through European eyes, the extreme individualism that constitutes a key part of American optimism translates into an unacceptable social scandal.
“Cities of tents are filling with the victims of the economic crisis,” read one headline a month ago on the front page of a mass-circulation US newspaper. Journalists report tragic stories of middle-class Americans losing their jobs and homes, potentially putting their lives at risk without any social protection.
Who will pay for your costly cancer treatment if you lose the health insurance policy that came with your job? It is wrong to assume, as some ultra-free marketers do, that the absence of social protection makes you stronger. The ambition of a country and a society born of the principles of the Enlightenment cannot be to create a people armed to the teeth with guns yet entirely disarmed in the face of illness.
Moreover, in a society that “lives to work,” where one’s job is such a central component of one’s identity, the loss of work is more destabilizing than in a culture where one “works to live,” as in Europe. Americans’ perspective on retirement is highly revealing: They are afraid of it. What will they do?
This perspective is not simply rooted in economics, even if today a large proportion of older Americans are rushing back to work as the downturn wrecks their retirement plans. The geographic separation of families, owing to the size of the US and Americans’ mobility, makes the association between retirement and being a grandparent less practicable in the US than it is in Europe.
In Europe, meanwhile, there is undeniably less collective hope and probably a little less individual fear. Perhaps because they are older and more cynical, European societies seem to bask in a “collective moroseness” from which they have difficulty emerging.
The record level of abstention in recent European Parliament elections is further proof of that growing cynicism and alienation. Of course, it is neither possible nor desirable to “clone” Obama in each of the EU’s 27 member states. But what is needed to reduce the deficit of hope that plagues Europe today?
The answer is far from obvious. Europe suffers from a shortage of leaders who can speak in its name and from a shortage of ambition — what, after all, is the collective ambition of Europeans now that the EU is perceived more as part of the problem than part of the solution?
But, above all, Europe suffers from an identity deficit, for no one seems to know what it means to be a European nowadays. The US, by contrast, seems to have an abundance of all the things Europe lacks.
Formulated in such terms, the European challenge seems even more formidable than the American one. Nevertheless, it is far from clear that the US will find it easier to reform its health and social security system — and thus alleviate the individual fears of its citizens — than for Europe to inspire its citizens with a sense of collective hope.
In reality, Europe and the US should represent a source of mutual inspiration that would reduce the human consequences of inequality in the one and restore a sense of hope in the other.
Dominique Moisi is a visiting professor of government at Harvard University.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Ahead of US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) meeting today on the sidelines of the APEC summit in South Korea, an op-ed published in Time magazine last week maliciously called President William Lai (賴清德) a “reckless leader,” stirring skepticism in Taiwan about the US and fueling unease over the Trump-Xi talks. In line with his frequent criticism of the democratically elected ruling Democratic Progressive Party — which has stood up to China’s hostile military maneuvers and rejected Beijing’s “one country, two systems” framework — Lyle Goldstein, Asia engagement director at the US think tank Defense Priorities, called
A large majority of Taiwanese favor strengthening national defense and oppose unification with China, according to the results of a survey by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). In the poll, 81.8 percent of respondents disagreed with Beijing’s claim that “there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China,” MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) told a news conference on Thursday last week, adding that about 75 percent supported the creation of a “T-Dome” air defense system. President William Lai (賴清德) referred to such a system in his Double Ten National Day address, saying it would integrate air defenses into a
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS