Why many Republicans hate Europe and lie about the situation there?

reply to post by ANOK

because the ultimate goal of socialism is the liberty of the working class from the chains of authoritarian institutions, including capitalism. The goal of socialism is 'free association'.

What person willingly gives up private property for the common good? The answer is people who have been indoctrinated to believe they will get more out of it than they put in, and to enforce the rules, there must be Statist authoritarianism. If it were not so, Mayor Bloomberg would not be trying to force people to have their diets curtailed for their own good in the name of the Common Good.

How can the working class be construed to be liberated when the authoritarian rule takes away their private property and their right to keep their own paycheck? Or when their right to have a Big Gulp is taken away arbitrarily regardless of how much their paycheck is? Or when free speech is curtailed because to do so would be to go against the State.
I know you believe that anarchism gets rid of that, but where have you ever seen a genuine anarchist system where this works at all?

reply to post by juleol


So all of Europe's problems are the fault of the US and not their own overspending and bloated government programs...

mmmhmmm

Or perhaps better stated, a global economy and government mechanism causes the entire ship to go down. Not a very good case for centralized control.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Nobody gives up willingly private property for the common good, to provide money for the military police, public roads and buildings, research and other. Thats why we need certain tools.

Think about the ultimate consequence, what kind of country would that be, where one person wins the economy, manages to cash in all the money? Would there be goods and services for that winner to enjoy? With what money is the rest of the country supposed to create anything the one with all the money would want?

Just look at Africa, or past Africa. A dictator that looted the country went shopping outside of Africa, because someplace people only make a dollar a week nobody has the resources to engineer you a Ferrari, or anything you might want.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by juleol

 

So all of Europe's problems are the fault of the US and not their own overspending and bloated government programs...

mmmhmmm

Or perhaps better stated, a global economy and government mechanism causes the entire ship to go down. Not a very good case for centralized control.

Its funny how the countries which have all the problems are not the ones with extensive social programs and high taxation, such as Sweden, Germany and other, but countries where tax evasion is rampant, such as Italy and Spain, where government services are at a minimum and government/social programs a shadow of those you find in the affluent European countries.

There are two reasons Republicans hate Europe:

1. because they don't know a damn thing about it

2. because they are afraid that if Americans see that societies can function fine without religious and military extremism, then they will lose their power because no one will vote for their garbage.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Perhaps that really depends on what your definition of "rights" is. To a social democrat, a right denotes the right to have a job, a home, food, clothing, cars (or maybe bikes in some places) and whatever else at the expense of the state. To a conservative, a right means private property rights acquired through personal work, and the right to life and liberty, the right to express discontent against government tyranny, and such.

So which type of rights does the EU have?

Every nation has different laws, although on overall I can bring out these from European Union constitution:

eur-lex.europa.eu...:C:2010:083:0389:0403:ENDF

The Charter of Fundamental Rights contains a preamble and 54 Articles, grouped in seven chapters:

chapter I: dignity (human dignity, the right to life, the right to the integrity of the person, prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, prohibition of slavery and forced labour);

chapter II: freedoms (the right to liberty and security, respect for private and family life, protection of personal data, the right to marry and found a family, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and association, freedom of the arts and sciences, the right to education, freedom to choose an occupation and the right to engage in work, freedom to conduct a business, the right to property, the right to asylum, protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition);

chapter III: equality (equality before the law, non-discrimination, cultural, religious and linguistic diversity, equality between men and women, the rights of the child, the rights of the elderly, integration of persons with disabilities);

chapter IV: solidarity (workers’ right to information and consultation within the undertaking, the right of collective bargaining and action, the right of access to placement services, protection in the event of unjustified dismissal, fair and just working conditions, prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work, family and professional life, social security and social assistance, health care, access to services of general economic interest, environmental protection, consumer protection);

chapter V: citizens’ rights (the right to vote and stand as a candidate at elections to the European Parliament and at municipal elections, the right to good administration, the right of access to documents, European Ombudsman, the right to petition, freedom of movement and residence, diplomatic and consular protection);

chapter VI: justice (the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, presumption of innocence and the right of defence, principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, the right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence);
chapter VII: general provisions

europa.eu...

I would not say these rights differ from US. Most countries have additional rights added in their constitutions, although every EU nation has to have these rights covered. Some countries have added internet as human right. For example, Finland has made it that by 2015 every person has to have access to 150 mbit/s internet. + there are many more rights I have.

As you can see every "conservative" right is covered. You seem to believe as if all Europe was living on benefits. That is far from being true. Not much people "use" the system, there are some, but very large majority does not. As you can see none of the above are rights in European Union Constitution as are they not in any country. You have to work to find a job, to get a home, to get food, clothing and car.

Although what differs largelt in EU is the social guarantees. Many things that happen in our lives are out of control, should we be held responsible for these? Of course my taxes, might seem high, yet I am more than happy to pay these, as I know whatever happens I will be safe. If I fall ill, I get sick day pay + I get access to any healthcare. I do not have to worry how much my insurance covers. Whatever happens, I get the treatment for a bit more than 10% of my monthly salary. Many Americans pay far more for their insurance. If my wife has a kid, she gets paid for 3 years of mother vacation in order to help out the kid.

If my company goes bankrupt, I am helped out. I am paying for it after all, although again in US I would pay much more for it due as the insurance companies need to earn.

The kids in poor families have much more opportunities here, as they do not have to worry about getting a good public and higher education. They the right for it, and a kid´s life is not dependent on their parents income and they do not have to start life with debt.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Overally I would say Europeans overally have much more opportunities to make it in life than in US, especially if coming from very poor families. The education is stronger and higher education is free of charge or cheap. Due to the universal health care they do not have to worry about their health, as they are paying for it at the end.

There are far less private schools, in some countries none, as these ruin the public education. Education is believed not to be dependent on money, so finances would not dictate the strength of ones education.

For a young person to start life, it is easier due to cheapness/free cost of universities. They have the opportunity to start life without extreme debt or dependence on their parents income.

Overally people get far more than in US for their taxes, so many are actually happy these, as these are worth the money. There are no middle men (like insurance companies), which makes it a lot cheaper to give same quality healthcare or other opportunities when one is in trouble, which is out of one´s control. Should one be held financially responsible for things out of their control, like genetic diseases, poor decisions by company management, their parents income?

reply to post by Merinda


Paying for roads and public access is one thing. Social welfare in the form of forcing people to buy health insurance is quite another, don't you think?
People who promote social welfare programs tend to place services like firemen, policemen, and road building in the same category as redistributing wealth in the form of food stamps and section 8 housing. It is not the same. All the people in a county will benefit from the roads, but I can assure you I don't benefit from Section 8 housing.
I would also point out that this administration tried to sell the Stimulus as a need to repair roads and bridges and call it "shovel-ready" jobs, but the Stimulus really paved the way for upgrading electronic medical health records(HITECH ACT) in preparation for the overhaul of the health care system(Obamacare) and also for Common Core Standards (indoctrination of the children toward Statist ideals and centralization of the education system-communist/socialist/fascist/statist) not to mention the data mining and tracking involved in that as well.

So not all public services are equal.


HITECH Stimulus

Entitlement funds are available to Medicare and Medicaid participating providers (hospitals, physicians and other providers) as an incentive to develop and improve their health information technology (HIT) capabilities, primarily in the area of electronic health records (EHRs) (+/-$34 billion).

www.fuzeqna.com...


www.ahima.org...

Common Core Stimulus

The Obama Administration spent an unprecedented $4.35 billion in Stimulus money to create an incentive for states to join the Common Core Standards and compete in the Race to the Top competition.

truthinamericaneducation.com... -exceeds-race-top-stimulus-funds/

SIECUS also boasted getting Stimulus funds. SIECUS is involved with Planned Parenthood in the preparation of sex education programs.
Did you know that very explicit sex education for kindergartners is part of Common Core in the form of "Sexual Education Core Standards" ?

None of this had to do with road building per se and everything to do with expanding the centralized control of the State.

reply to post by Cabin

Overally I would say Europeans overally have much more opportunities to make it in life than in US

Definitely a matter of opinion, same as suggesting that having rights means someone else needs to pay for my stuff.

As an american living in a european country, I am always in awe of the disinformation and lies that are spread in the US about Europe. It is frustrating to listen to, especially of it is close family members.

I keep trying to read the rest of the thread, but many of the comments reflect this ignorance so much I just can't follow along. I've also learned that there is no hope in explaining where they are mistaken- people believe what they want to believe and for their own reasons.

I know that even for me, I was able to hold my false ideas in mind for years against all evidence to the contrary in front of me. Our world view is an important anchor for our personality and shaking it up is so traumatic, we can cling to it through amazing challenges....

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by juleol

 

So all of Europe's problems are the fault of the US and not their own overspending and bloated government programs...

mmmhmmm

Or perhaps better stated, a global economy and government mechanism causes the entire ship to go down. Not a very good case for centralized control.

The recession first started from US. Some EU countries had troubles before and the 2008 crisis triggered recession all over Europe, which led to troubles in some countries with weaker economies (problems before) , which eventually weakened Euro and made it hard for every country in Europe.

Greece is their own overspending, but not on government welfare programs, but corruption and public sector. They would have went bankrupt sooner or later.

Spains housing bubble burst after the 2008 recession. Nothing to do with welfare, but banks

Portugal mishandled their finances for decades, overspending on government salaries and not regulating the economy well enough.

Ireland crisis started from 2008 recession, when the house bubble burst. Banks.

Italy took loans historically+ there is more corruption and due to euro weakening, there are less investments, less growth and they can´t pay back the loans well.

Cypruses banks mishandled their money.

Every other country is doing so-so, due to the crisis, but not overspending. EU countries are so inter-connected due to euro that whichever one of these has trouble it affects everybody else too.

As you can see nothing has happened because of overspending on welfare. Pretty much the same as in US. government decisions on handling the money and not well-regulated banks. US is not the fault of this. Sooner or later the bubble´s would have burst anyways, currently simply the main reason was the recession started in 2008 in US.

The countries who are spending the most on welfare per capita are in quite low debt to be honest. Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland have all government debts under 50% of GDP, 30-50%, which is far less than in US for example... (73,6%)

reply to post by Bluesma

am always in awe of the disinformation and lies that are spread in the US about Europe.

I would personally like to get some specific details of these lies and disinfo. Especially the stuff in this thread which you feel doesn't match your experience. You are living abroad? Does that mean that you gave up your citizenship or would you say that socialist benefits which affect EU citizens relate to you economically somehow?
Generalities won't work if you are really trying to refute the so-called lies about European socialism. So please how about something not so ethereal. Otherwise I may think you are a rich Hollywood starlet with lots of money to throw around and bodyguards and the like.

reply to post by Cabin


Cabin, I'm sorry but you sound like another Progressive to me blaming all the economic woes on Capitalism. I understand the problem with the banking industry and I agree wholeheartedly with the problems with that. But let me ask you something....does not the bailout of a banking institution also represent corporate welfare???? that is the public paying for private problems? The problems with socialists is that they are ok with sucking off the public teat for pet groups of people or projects but not the ones they don't like. For instance, what Progressive will stand for Monsanto getting public funds? But every Progressive will say it's fine to give money to illegals because they just want to work.
Don't you see the hypocrisy? For Monsanto you call it corporatism for illegals you call it "They just want to work so we have to help them".

Also how do you account for the current crop of socialists in the WH who enabled a bailout of AIG which bailed out Goldman Sachs....and you know there are bunches of GS employees who work for the WH now...
Then there was the auto bailout....Obama presided over this one. Then there was Obamacare....I've heard that part of the Obamacare push was to unionize health care workers....more socialism.
AIG was giving Sharia compliant loans out and then got taxpayer funded bailouts and Sec Treasurer TIm Geithner personally was involved in all that. Tim Geithner's family is connected to the Obama/Dunham family through the Ford Foundation.

The countries who are spending the most on welfare per capita are in quite low debt to be honest. Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland have all government debts under 50% of GDP

I've posted evidence before that these countries often have a mixed economy and that really blurs the lines between the effects of Capitalist venture and the effects of socialist programs.
Cuba is a purely Communist country and they occasionally run out of toilet paper, and their health care is not properly represented by Moore's ridiculous documentary "Sicko". They are by far not a wealthy society. Communism and Socialism doesn't work at all without Capitalist money....makes one pause.

reply to post by Cabin


Speaking of housing bubbles, let's talk about the mortgage crisis here. Progressives like to blame it all on the evil banks. Whereas I have no sympathy for banking vultures, this does not mean that Capitalism is fully to blame, for if left without government forcing them to make risky loans in the name of social equality things might not have played out the way they did. Something more to think about.
Barney Frank personally looked the other way on Fannie/Freddie while receiving donations from them. Even having oversight committees apparently doesn't make sure the evil banks don't do funny things.
Here's an excellent commentary on the Barney Frank Housing bubble

bubblemeter.blogspot.com...

That article says how much Franklin Raines made from Fannie/Freddie....a nice golden parachute off of government subsidized loans wouldn't you say? That is MORE socialism and someone made off prettily from it.

EU countries are so inter-connected due to euro t

and who propped up the Euro against the British pound? Why it was billionaire socialist George Soros.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

You are living abroad? Does that mean that you gave up your citizenship or would you say that socialist benefits which affect EU citizens relate to you economically somehow?

Yes I live in France. I have double nationality, as do my children.
The economic and political systems in France relate to me as I live in them and as part of them.
I pay taxes, I benefit from the same rights and responsibilities as all other french citizens.
But I arrived here as an adult, and have now spent exactly half my life in the US, and half here.

Generalities won't work if you are really trying to refute the so-called lies about European socialism.

As I wrote in the post you quoted, I am not interested in trying to refute the lies about European socialism.

I recognize it is a waste of time and energy. When people swallow so heartily such propaganda, with no real evidence to support it, there is a reason- it serves an emotional purpose and need . (just like religion). It is a belief system they have emotional investment in and will fight with every inch of denial and hostility to protect.

So please how about something not so ethereal. Otherwise I may think you are a rich Hollywood starlet with lots of money to throw around and bodyguards and the like.

Feel free to think I am whatever you wish to believe, it doesn't matter to me either way, and you will any way.

This is also an issue with some on the left. The argument goes that Europe is socialist and yet life is good over here. Except that Europe is not socialist but capitalist, even tough it leans a bit more to socialism than the US.

And regarding less freedom in Europe, I think that is arguable but ultimately, less freedom does not help anyone and if it is true that situation in Europe is good even when we have less freedoms, then it is despite it, not thanks to it.

reply to post by Cabin



The simple fact is that most Americans do not have a passport. Fair play to them but it basically follows that they cannot really form a CREDIBLE opinion. Without the benefits of travelling to those countries and seeing Europe first hand all is hot air. I hold both passports.

Mitt Romney is an idiot and Obama kicked his ass. Before people open their pie-holes they should investigate things in detail.

After WW2, Britain was on the verge of a massive civil unrest that could have seen revolution. Not only that but Karl Marx was amazed that Britain did not have revolution.

The British ruling class basically decided it was necessary to have a world class welfare state to stem this tide of revolution. Who gave these US politician the right to be Missionaries of the American Way?? The tried that with Vietnam and look what happened!

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

I do consider myself follower of any particular political ideology. On the spectrum I would probably set myself into somewhere centre-left, not progressives, not social democrats, not greens.

- I believe in equal opportunities, where everybody would have same opportunities not dependent on the size of their wallet.

- I believe circumstances out of one´s control should not dictate one´s life financially, that is why the social safety nets.

- I believe in environmental consequences should be more important than finances.

- I believe in personal responsibility over the actions one can control.

- I believe strong should help the weaker ones (progressive taxes), which would lessen the wealth gap. People who have naturally given talents should help the ones without none. Wealth gap should always exist, although it should not be that large as it right now and progressive taxes and other similar methods help to lessen it, not lose it. Otherwise personal responsibility would not be rewarded.

- I believe in mixed/hybrid economy, where basic human rights are not profiteered from, including right for water, right for food, right for higher education and right for health care, yet any luxuries and extra services can be profited from by private companies.

- I believe in well-regulated free markets, where worker rights are above maximising the profits. Profits should exist, but not on the expense of cheap labour.

- I believe corporations should have less power, yet small-businesses more.

- I believe the rights of people and the right for a clean and healthy environment being more important than corporate rights.

- I believe in human rights and property rights.

- I believe society is as strong as its weakest members. The stronger the weakest ones , the stronger the society.

- I believe in social responsibilities for people and corporations in order to create a strong community

These have characteristics of all centre-left ideologies. I do not support socialism nor do I support capitalism. Balance is always the best solution. I know these sound like utopia, but these are my views.

To be honest, most of the current economic woes are direct results of Capitalism and Consumerism. Whether we like it or not, the driving force behind Capitalism is greed. Add together a mix of greedy "capitalists", weakly regulated markets and materialistic consumers with poor financial intelligence and you get the situation where US and parts of Europe are now. Greed is the common denominator between all these countries in poor financial situation.

It is not only Capitalism, it is greed which leds to such results. Capitalism only encourages the greed and enables it. When profits become more important than human life and environment, there will always be consequences of such behaviour and that is what we are seeing daily in the world of today.

I do not like term Socialists as socialism is an extreme left after all, yet no developed nations has such policies. Considering US democrats decisions, they seem to be more centre/centre-right than left-wing.

I have no support for such bail-outs as the banks got, although it was a tough decision to make. Large banks are simply too large to fail. In short-term the bail-out was a right decision, in long-term - I personally doubt so. This decision was more right than left though. People had to pay for the mistakes of right-wing actions. The banks were doing what nearly any capitalistic company is excepted to do, maximise the profits. Supporting corporates is a right-wing action, so the Monsanto deal was also right-wing action.

I've posted evidence before that these countries often have a mixed economy and that really blurs the lines between the effects of Capitalist venture and the effects of socialist programs.
Cuba is a purely Communist country and they occasionally run out of toilet paper, and their health care is not properly represented by Moore's ridiculous documentary "Sicko". They are by far not a wealthy society. Communism and Socialism doesn't work at all without Capitalist money....makes one pause.

Have I ever implied these countries are socialist? This thread is all about no European country being socialist, which is a lie many Republicans spread. All of these countries are democratic countries having more social safety networks than US, but these are not socialist countries as they are made to believe.

reply to post by Cabin


The bulk of people that vote in the US couldn't find Europe on a map. I'm not talking about the educated people that use this site...of course.

Because so many people in the US are brainwashed to believe that anything which isn't America is somehow bad, Republicans can use an "exotic" far away land like Europe as a boogeyman. And because so many people of the republican persuasion will never leave this country, and only absorb information about another place if it fits into their talking points world view, it's easy to use Europe in that regard.

It is nothing personal, they hate every non American equally.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Cabin

 

I've posted evidence before that these countries often have a mixed economy and that really blurs the lines between the effects of Capitalist venture and the effects of socialist programs.
Cuba is a purely Communist country and they occasionally run out of toilet paper, and their health care is not properly represented by Moore's ridiculous documentary "Sicko". They are by far not a wealthy society. Communism and Socialism doesn't work at all without Capitalist money....makes one pause.

edit on 27-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Well when Americans refer to Europe and socialism and accuse each other of being too European they are talking about Denmark, Sweden, Germany etc., not about Russia Marx Stalin and Gulags.

reply to post by Cabin

When studying the US political culture I have noticed the tendency of Republican party being very anti-Europe in their statements, often outragiously lying about the situation there, whether consciously or due to lack of knowledge.

Neither you, or your sources, have objectively SHOWN a tendency of The Republican Party to "outragiously" lie about the situation in Europe. Your sources only TOLD you of such a tendency. Now you are the one, "whether consciously or due to lack of knowledge", spreading a message based on nothing more than propaganda.

Europe is often portrayed as being socialistic overtaxed nanny-state, where people have no rights and opportunities, while all the money is taken by the government.

Until now, I have never known Europe to be "portrayed" in such a broad, and all encompassing, fashion. Where did you get that from?

In ATS there are overally intelligent people with wider horizon, so here it is not a problem, yet it is uncommon to see posts, which are based on biased assumptions

I don't feel posts "which are based on biased assumptions" are, in the least bit, rare on ATS! Your post is highly biased!

I have nothing against US, although I severely dislike the way European nations are portrayed by the Republican Party.

Well... I'm not particularly fond of your misinformed portrayal of The Republican Party as being a bunch of misguided morons, either.

See ya,
Milt