I think there is something to the factors in terms of both size and history lmoelleb and Ken were discussing in trying to explain the differences in philosophy between the US and many European countries. A country that was "born" as a result of a revolution might indeed very well have a different outlook on things from one that evolved from an autocratic monarchy or something of that nature. It should be interesting then to find out how the position of some of the new European countries (e.g. in former Yugoslavia) on these issues will evolve.

Talking about size (or rather scale, as I would put it), you could say the US and its federal government are best compared to the European Union as a whole, whereas individual European countries should be compared to individual states in the US. Once you look at it that way (I know, it's a seriously flawed analogy, e.g. with regard to defence), certain parallels emerge. For instance, many European citizens seriously distrust the Brussels bureaucracy, as e.g. evidenced by the French and Dutch NO in a referendum on the proposed European constitution and by the British and Danish opt-outs on some joint European agreements and the euro currency. Europeans would not accept Brussels taking responsibility for our education systems or welfare systems either, nor would they welcome any form of tax to be paid directly to Brussels. Many Europeans hate the waste of money, the inefficiency and the corruption at the Union level. At least, that's what I would guess how many of my fellow Europeans are feeling.

Now I'm curious whether similar parallels continue once you start comparing individual European countries to individual US states. Would it be fair to say, for instance, that US citizens do not nearly distrust their state governments as much as they do their federal government? Or that state taxes are considered to be more acceptable than federal taxes? I don't know the answers to these questions. Do any fellow US users have any thoughts on this?

Oh, deejay, I could expound upon this for a very long time. hOwever from my perspective allow me to give a bit of historical viewpoint in this area. Prior to the Johnson administration and the Carter administration the states were for more independent than they are today. then the Cental Governement began to incrementally to powers away from the states, and make the states monetarily dependent on the Central Government, the states still have their own tax systems but a an increasingly large percentage of their overall budget is comings from the Feds with all the issues that raises. If you don't behave, I won't give you your allowance as it were. This, in large, part is why Hal said what he did. The Federal Government in Education should play a much smaller role than they do, to the point that they are very close to dictating what classes will be and how they will be taught, this has led to a rather astounding increase in home schooling in the US.

The US government needs to take a deep breath, tighten THEIR belt and reduce both the size of the Government but also the bite on its citizens wallet.

Skip

Deejay,

As a US user that lives near Chicago in Illinois I can say that many of my fellow citizens are deeply distrustful of our State government b/c it is so poorly run right now -- the legislature and executive are controlled by one party (the Democrats) and they can't get anything done and are constantly fighting to the point where tax legislation critical to local government funding was delayed for months causing local governments to have to borrow money to cover their basic costs. As far as local government (city/village) it is generally better but our largest cities (Chicago in particular) are rife with corruption and abuse -- there seems to be a new scandal every year involving government contracts etc.

I personally find my political philosophy to be very much like Skip. I don't want the government to take care of me -- I want it to do only things that it really must do -- National Defense, Law Enforcement, and Courts (to provide a forum for disputes between citizens).

As for the overall points being raised I agree that the US and most European countries have a great deal in common --- especially compared to the tyrannical murderous regimes of the world -- North Korea, Iran, Cuba etc. I also feel strongly that we must do our best to maintain our cohesiveness on the important matters of our time just like we did in the past with great success. Our collective triumph over first Naziism and then Communism were great victories for freedom and democracy and we must win again over Islamofascism which threatens all of us.

I salute the sacrifices of our WW II allies and our NATO allies in those struggles -- Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Canada, Great Britain etc. as well as our recently free allies in Poland, the Baltic States, and the Czech Republic etc.

We must remember of common cause even as our freedom and differences causes friction between us as to how to win this latest struggle. I know that most if us can agree on that.

I'm aware that Dutch have a growing problem within their country with Islamic immigrants becoming Balkanized and not adapting to the culture of their new home. The murder of Van Gogh and the death threats against the female Somali refugee legislator (Ali?) are proof of this. I wish you luck in handling that problem moving forward because though I may not agree with all of your domestic policies I recognize that the Netherlands is a wonderful country with a long and rich history -- I visited for several days about 10 years ago and had a great visit. Toured the country by car and saw the tulip fields, the royal estate, the art museums, Anne Franks home, etc.

Thanks for the lively discussion,

Brian

Indeed WE are, Jean-Paul.

I am still waiting BTW. Six years ago I offered Sheik Bin-Laden the opportunity to hand deliver his personal invitation to the 12th Century and we will see who walks off my front porch....it won't be him.   He has failed to accept my invitation thus far.

Skip

Deejay,

  I think I've heard of that guy -- isn't his name like Pim? or something like that? That's a big part of the problem that some film is grounds to destroy things and riot. One of my favorite commentators calls Islam the "religion of perpetual outrage" ---- it is interesting how many of these protests are staged or instigated by Islamic clerics as opposed to actually being spotaneous protests - the cartoon matters were like that. I also find it interesting that some of these Islamic leaders seem to be intent on using the West's tolerance against us by claiming victimhood when much of the actual violence that occurs is in their responses to these insults (cartoons, movies).

However if I was going to riot over a film it would probably be "Kangaroo Jack" -- which is trully offensive 

Brian

Deejay,

Thanks for the correction -- I obviously was thinking of the wrong guy. I'd forgotten Fortuyn was assisinated I think I'd heard that before. I'm concerned where this situation is heading for those of us in the west. The hard right politicians who bait Muslims with strong talk aren't helping, but if those of us who want a civil society where everyone can peacefully practice their faith don't make a strong push on the misbehavior of Muslims in our respective countries we may end up with these types of hard right politicians becoming very popular (i.e. Hitler in post WW I Germany).

I don't believe that all Muslims are bad or dangerous but a large number of them appear to lack the desire to learn to fit in to a pluralistic society -- as you state quite well -- freedom of speech for all means that you probably will get offended sometimes -- if you can't live with that and need to respond to these "insults" with violence and rioting you have a big problem. As a Christian I get offended by stuff from time to time and sometimes complain about it but I'm not going to riot or threaten to kill someone over it.

Holland is from I've seen, read, and heard a very welcoming society that generally tries hard to respect the views of its minorities but the goings on there in recent years are troubling b/c if these radical Muslims succeed in using our openess against us and subvert the freedoms of people like Wilders we'll all suffer for it.

Brian

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
For eample, our own welfare system only 40% of the Actual budget gets to those that "need" the aid, the other 60% is eaten by the bureaucracy.

Skip,

I hope you are not including Social Security Program when you talk about only 40% of the budget going to those in "need" because the the adminstrative costs of the program are miniscule compared to the amount paid to the beneficiaries.  While it's true that the SS Program is in danger of running out of money soon, it's not because of the administrative costs.  Maybe your numbers are true for other parts of our welfare system, they don't apply to Social Security.

I feel  this clarification is needed for the non-American audience.

Quoting bbursiek:

Quote:
...Holland is from I've seen, read, and heard a very welcoming society that generally tries hard to respect the views of its minorities but the goings on there in recent years are troubling b/c if these radical Muslims succeed in using our openess against us and subvert the freedoms of people like Wilders we'll all suffer for it.

Maybe sometimes we're too 'good,'  but our 'friend' Wilders is putting thins 'on edge' with the things he's saying. I work for one of the larger ICT service & solution companies and obviously I have a couple of Muslim collegues. You don't want to know what they have to say about Muslim extremists, or the teen  scum which roams the streets.
But thay have outspoken opinions about Geert Wilders. Especially when Wilders wanted to forbid the Koran in The Netherlands? In our history we, the Dutch, we not allowed any other religion except the Catholic religion. So these people had to express other religions in secrecy. This eventually led to the Eighty Years' War. (Please correct me if I am wrong, because it has been some time ago I was taught this )
Do we really want to go that way? I know Wilders' allowed to express his opinion, but when his movie leads to defacing Dutch embassies or destruction, just send the bill to Wilders.
I agree to the statement that the extremist Imam's might be better of in their country of origin and shouldn't be allowed to enter the country ever.