NationStates Jolt Archive

It's something I've noticed a lot, and I felt like taking a sounding.

How many of you (European citizens only, I'm afraid) are annoyed by people referring to "Europe" and "Europeans" as though it/they were one entity/homogenous group.

Being an American, I can't help but interrupt-- we can't very well go around saying, "Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc."

And that's my two cents (which is, admittedly, rather devalued against the euro, but that's life)

i'm really quite happy with it.

It's not a major thing, just... egh.:rolleyes:

Being an American, I can't help but interrupt-- we can't very well go around saying, "Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc."

In situations where it would be appropiate to use the //// it would indeed not be practical. Can you however think of something where it would be needed ? Excluding thinking Bush is an idiot of course.

Being an American, I can't help but interrupt-- we can't very well go around saying, "Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc."

And that's my two cents (which is, admittedly, rather devalued against the euro, but that's life)

You can't help but interrupt because you're an American?

Anyway, why can't you go around saying Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc?

I once met someone while travelling who believed the UK was cheating in the world cup as England Scotland and Wales all enter seprately- 'cos there all just the same country, right?'

Being an American, I can't help but interrupt-- we can't very well go around saying, "Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc."

And that's my two cents (which is, admittedly, rather devalued against the euro, but that's life)
How often would you need to say all that?

Meh. Hopefully one day Europe will be a giant country and it will be a non issue.

Alle menschen wirden brüder ;)

This can apply to any continental grouping.
What is an "American"? This term is generally used for United Statians, not for everyone from Peary Land to Isla Herschel.
Asians live from 25 degrees E to 172 degrees W.
So no continental grouping has any meaning, other than just that: an indication of what continent these people live.

Alle menschen wirden brüder ;)

Then the lack of Schwestern would quickly bring an end to humanity! :D

Meh. Hopefully one day Europe will be a giant country and it will be a non issue.

Ouch the Conservatives will slap you silly for that. Two things about Euro-politics:

1. The largest political grouping in the EU parliament is a Christian-Conservative anti EU grouping.
2. If this so called 'SuperState' was to be created it would fail at the first votes. The EU Parliament would vote against and states like France, ala the constitution, would vote against.

I'm a British-Liberal and I'm fully supportive of the EU. Indeed my 'type', as it were, are the most pro-Europeans. Regardless no-one I've ever met in my local Liberal Democrat meetings are supportive of a super-state. Oddly enough I can't think of anyone who is. This 'superstate' nonsense is a tool of the typical 'euro-right' to make the EU sound big and evil.

If Britain, or any other state, was to leave the EU the economics of that country would fail drastically. Free-trade between EU nations is key and a main point of support.

In comparison if...Iowa were to leave the Union of the United States it would fall by the knees, surely?

And my final point is in a world where the US is some super-mega-transforming-robotlike-overloard-hyper power (ahem) and China and India upcoming - and perhaps a reasnoble Russia - I think the EU needs to stand strong in the face of tough opposition.

In answer to your previous question generalise us as Europeans but if talking to one in particular call by country name. Me? Call me Niploma. Thats it, easy does it.

Doesn't bother me at all :)

For countries using the Euro as currency... sure, as they're all VERY similar countries now, same laws etc

But you get countries like England, Scotland, Wales and N.I. (the UK *ISNT* a country, its a kingdom...), Russia, Turkey.. All are VERY differnt from eachother, and even more so from the Single-Currency EU countries

I'm pro-national identity, thus I dont like all this whole EU-merging countries together.

And coming from a country that wants to stay seperate from the mainland... yes, being lumped under a continental name is an annoyance

If US citizens have 'Caucasion, Latino, Mexican' etc.. as names for people in their culture.. technically theyre all 'Americans' as they've gone through all the legal matters to live there... so why not just call them 'American'?

Ask an american where they're from...and they'll tell you their state...
Ask someone from 'The Rest of the World', and they'll tell you their country...

Dont be ignorant and lazy...

How often would you need to say all that?

You cannot refer to the EU as against the Iraq war. Then you'd have to say, ''France/Germany/Denmark/Ireland...''

Ouch the Conservatives will slap you silly for that. Two things about Euro-politics:

1. The largest political grouping in the EU parliament is a Christian-Conservative anti EU grouping.
2. If this so called 'SuperState' was to be created it would fail at the first votes. The EU Parliament would vote against and states like France, ala the constitution, would vote against.

I'm a British-Liberal and I'm fully supportive of the EU. Indeed my 'type', as it were, are the most pro-Europeans. Regardless no-one I've ever met in my local Liberal Democrat meetings are supportive of a super-state. Oddly enough I can't think of anyone who is. This 'superstate' nonsense is a tool of the typical 'euro-right' to make the EU sound big and evil.

If Britain, or any other state, was to leave the EU the economics of that country would fail drastically. Free-trade between EU nations is key and a main point of support.

In comparison if...Iowa were to leave the Union of the United States it would fall by the knees, surely?

And my final point is in a world where the US is some super-mega-transforming-robotlike-overloard-hyper power (ahem) and China and India upcoming - and perhaps a reasnoble Russia - I think the EU needs to stand strong in the face of tough opposition.

In answer to your previous question generalise us as Europeans but if talking to one in particular call by country name. Me? Call me Niploma. Thats it, easy does it.
Yeah, the only election where UKIP gets any seats is the European ones. The problem is far too much misunderstanding of ehat it would entail, WAY too much right wing propaganda, and, unfourtunatly, an inability of much of Britain to alow the events of the previous centuary to rest.

However I'm an idealist, and I'm not ashamed of that, and I look to the day when we do finally get a combined European state. It will happen eventually, just not for wuite a long time.

Meh. Hopefully one day Europe will be a giant country and it will be a non issue.

When that day comes I'll be packin my bags and fleeing to the US. Preserve the British identity!!

Meh. Hopefully one day Europe will be a giant country and it will be a non issue.
*nods*

*shrugs*

I prefer being called European rather than "English", when I'm from Scotland.

I fine with people saying Europe, I live in South West England but consider myself European more than British, English, "Southwestian" (or whatever) but even considering myself European has a limit, I'm me an nationality is only important in terms of where in the world you are and what laws you are living by.


oh and in reply,
1. The largest political grouping in the EU parliament is a Christian-Conservative anti EU grouping.
They're not anti-eu, the British Conservatives want to leave because they are "too federalist", the conservative grouping in Parliament is an alliance of two groups, the European Peoples Party and the European Democrats, the British Conservatives are part of the latter which makes that group more anti-EU but they form a very very thin semi-detached slice of the Conservative group. No, the majority of MEP's are pro-EU.

2. If this so called 'SuperState' was to be created it would fail at the first votes. The EU Parliament would vote against and states like France, ala the constitution, would vote against.
The EU insitutions would all be for it, and France and the Netherlands voted against the treaty, not again Europe, for instance in France there were many issues such as the treaty enshrining anglo-saxon economic policy, and also they wanted to snub Chirac. In a sense we already have a Super-State in some areas as the EU is a mixture of Federal, Confederal and Inter-governmental systems, our Foreign Policy may be split but in terms of currency we are federal. If it's written right and with the right leaders with the right vision and enough democracy (such as an electable commission) a Super-State Constitution would be approved by the public, polls do show a majority in favour in principle, even if they are pissed off with what the leaders are doing with it.

You cannot refer to the EU as against the Iraq war. Then you'd have to say, ''France/Germany/Denmark/Ireland...''
You can't say that but you can say that "Europeans were against the Iraq war" which you could tell through every poll and protest that the people seamed to agree, even if the states couldn't agree -and most of those gov't have since been toppled such as Spain and Italy or sevearly punished.

You cannot refer to the EU as against the Iraq war. Then you'd have to say, ''France/Germany/Denmark/Ireland...''

That already encounters a problem. Denmark, for example, is in Iraq, but the people of Denmark didn't really support it.

Now, knowing that a majority of Europeans are generally against the war in Iraq, but not every government of Europe is, isn't it much easier to just say Europeans are against the war in Iraq, and if you need details, talk about the governments?

Now, knowing that a majority of Europeans are generally against the war in Iraq, but not every government of Europe is, isn't it much easier to just say Europeans are against the war in Iraq, and if you need details, talk about the governments?

I don't think its true that, in the UK atleast, the majority of people were against the war. However, public protests by the still significant number of objectors and constant Blair-bashing by tory controlled papers does help to give that impression.

And yes, it is annoying when say, in reference to me, an American says I'm European. I don't mean in describing which continent I'm from or if I'm in a group with other people from various European countries, but if he/she is treating that as my nationality.

I am first European, second Scottish, third British. Britain IS a country (a political unit) but it is NOT a nation. Actually I liked the response from the guy in south west England: before I am even European, I am simply human (despite what you may have heard). However, I really consider Europe to be my country; it is the unit I identify myself with. It is, however, a FEDERAL country rather than a superstate, just as the United States is a single country but still talks, rightly. about states' rights, and despite the fact that it has different laws, different taxation (sales tax etc.) and so on from state to state.

There was at least one option missing from the polls: I am not only unannoyed when someone refers to me as "European" but positively pleased. In reality it is more a geographical description than a political one, but it is nonetheless accurate, as this island IS in fact in Europe. Call me British and you are still accurate, call me Scottish and you are even more accurate, or more precise anyway. Call me English and you are NOT being accurate, and that is EXTREMELY annoying. As one guy has already pointed out. I do not call someone from Iowa Texan (my wife is Texan), I would be incorrect if I did so, and you are no less incorrect if you call me English.

Look forward to the day (in a generation or two) when the EU comes to it's senses, creates a federalized constitution (of about 5-10 pages in length) and makes English the official language.

Impossible? Not at all. The current structure will never be okayed by the whole of the EU anyway (and wasn't, spectacularly... twice!).

Why English?
Because:
1)It's the language already spoken by most of Europe as a secondary tongue.
2)The French and Poles (and quite a few others) will never accept German.
3) Italian is a non-starter. Ditto Dutch, Polish, etc.
4) Spanish? Probably the second best choice.
5) French? Why bother when 6 of the major planetary economies (US, UK, Canada, NZ, Australia, South Africa) all speak English, as well as most of Asia for business purposes?

It's going to happen. It's just going to take time, as it did in the US. The USE is in it's "Articles of Confederation" stage right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_confederation

one in every tweny Europeans discribe themselves as European (as a prime marker of their identity)

The rest, indeed, prefers to be identified by their nationality or membership of an ethnic or regional minority.

I think that "Europeans" as a word for anything between the atlantic and the Caucasus/ Ural is slightly wrong.

It's like putting Chilenes and US-citizens in one cathegory ("Americans") and assuming that you may find significant common denominators that are unique for this part of the world. "Ex-colony" may well be the only one.

BUT: it's even worse that we use the word Americans when we actually mean "US-citizens". As if Canada can help to be next to the country which' citizens "bush yhe world around" ;) :D

Look forward to the day (in a generation or two) when the EU comes to it's senses, creates a federalized constitution (of about 5-10 pages in length) and makes English the official language.

Impossible? Not at all. The current structure will never be okayed by the whole of the EU anyway (and wasn't, spectacularly... twice!).

Why English?
Because:
1)It's the language already spoken by most of Europe as a secondary tongue.
2)The French and Poles (and quite a few others) will never accept German.
3) Italian is a non-starter. Ditto Dutch, Polish, etc.
4) Spanish? Probably the second best choice.
5) French? Why bother when 6 of the major planetary economies (US, UK, Canada, NZ, Australia, South Africa) all speak English, as well as most of Asia for business purposes?

It's going to happen. It's just going to take time, as it did in the US. The USE is in it's "Articles of Confederation" stage right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_confederation

You think the English language would become Europe's if a superstate was formed? Hmm, I'm not so sure. There are far more German speakers (first language) in th EU than English speakers. I'll also think you'll find that the French, in the current political climate, have less love for the English than the Germans. If the EU was federalized I think they would keep on all the original languages as official in the member 'states'.

You can't help but interrupt because you're an American?

Anyway, why can't you go around saying Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc?

I don't think his inferior geographically challenged brain can handle all the extra information! HAWHAHWAHAWHLOLOLOLROFL!!!! (sorry bout the stereotype.)

I don't see whats wrong with non-"europeans" calling "europeans" by their rightful names. I call English English, and Germans Germans. Theres no harm in that. Its like calling everyone from South America (Brazillians, Venezuelians, Chileans, Argentinians, Bolivians, Peruvians etc...) South Americans.

Im all for calling Brits Brits and so on.

Look forward to the day (in a generation or two) when the EU comes to it's senses, creates a federalized constitution (of about 5-10 pages in length) and makes English the official language.[/url]

I prefer it the way it is now:

English, French and German are the official languages. You have to know at least two to be able to communicate with everyone.

Wait, no, I was wrong there. There used to be twelve official languages. I believe there are about twenty two now. It's never been an issue before, why would it be an issue now?

And then you have national languages.

4) Spanish? Probably the second best choice.


Nah, wouldn't be Spanish. For a start Spanish is not even a language. You probably mean Castillian, but if that's not even spoken by everyone in Spain (in some regions it is vehemently not spoken) what's the chance of it becoming Europe wide?

Depends what is meant. When people use it to refer only to the EU the usage is rather limiting, since it discounts Russians and a lot of people inbetween. It also suggests a homogenity that may not be felt on the ground, despite all the shared history (and, I'll say it, culture). But then we (should) all know that generalisations are not much good.

Those Americans, for instance, aren't all bad...

5) French? Why bother when 6 of the major planetary economies (US, UK, Canada, NZ, Australia, South Africa) all speak English, as well as most of Asia for business purposes?

LOL!!! New Zealand as a Major Planetary Economy! Yay! We had a 1.6 Billion dollar surplus this year and apparently cannot afford tax-cuts/don't want tax cuts.
Our finance minister is a penis.

*shrugs*

I prefer being called European rather than "English", when I'm from Scotland.

Heh. Well that made me smile. I don't mind if I'm termed British, English, European or perhaps even Irish - as I spend a lot of time there. Couldnt care less.

You can retain identity still within a Union. No offence to Americans in Texas but Texas is still semi-ridiculed and cited quite often as TEXAS! Yeehaw! Etc. Sure, it aint an identity but they've retained the past whilst still in a greater Union.

In Northern Ireland people there are technically Britons, although they shoudlnt and will save that arguement for another day, although some groups aka nationalists and republicans reserve their identity in several ways.

All this ''we'll lose our Britishness'' is a load of old propaganda rubbish. Get with the times.

I don't think its true that, in the UK atleast, the majority of people were against the war. However, public protests by the still significant number of objectors and constant Blair-bashing by tory controlled papers does help to give that impression.

And yes, it is annoying when say, in reference to me, an American says I'm European. I don't mean in describing which continent I'm from or if I'm in a group with other people from various European countries, but if he/she is treating that as my nationality.

Hah! Don't make me laugh! Tory papers support the war as a general rule!

The Times Not technically Tory but supportive
The Daily Telegraph Tory to the max and supportive

Now, the lefties:

Independent = supreme anti war
Morning Star = largest communist paper and is infuriated at anything New Labour does

and of course the Old Labour supportive anti-New Labour and anti-war paper, The Guardian

Left hates the left. Right hates the new-left right.*

(As a point, I don't believe left-right is a good way to place a person/grouping. www.politicalcompass.org, people!)

I quite like being called a European, actually. It gives a sense that all of Europe is pretty much united, which is a great thing.

Roll on a European Federation!

Why would only English have to be the official language? I agree that each country would probably keep their language as the official one and in the constitution just have it that there's more than one.

In South Africa for example there are 11 official languages. So Europe can do the same.

Europe is never going to be a united nation, but if you want to refer to me as European I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Why would only English have to be the official language? I agree that each country would probably keep their language as the official one and in the constitution just have it that there's more than one.

In South Africa for example there are 11 official languages. So Europe can do the same.

The European Union has one of the most sophisticated interpreting services anywhere in the world. Any MEP can speak in any of the member states' official languages and will be understood by any other MEP within seconds. It is perhaps a testament to Europe's ability to cope with cultural and linguistic diversity, when it wants to, that this works so smoothly.

And as long as it works, just one language seems positively dull!

Learning languages also does good things for cognitive development.

The European Union has one of the most sophisticated interpreting services anywhere in the world. Any MEP can speak in any of the member states' official languages and will be understood by any other MEP within seconds. It is perhaps a testament to Europe's ability to cope with cultural and linguistic diversity, when it wants to, that this works so smoothly.

And as long as it works, just one language seems positively dull!

Learning languages also does good things for cognitive development.

Here-here.

You cannot refer to the EU as against the Iraq war. Then you'd have to say, ''France/Germany/Denmark/Ireland...''
Considering that Britain is European and pro that war it would be incorrect to say that Europe was against. Or if you mean EU, then that is a separate political group, and not equal to France/Germany/... = Europe.

roll aside european union, here comes eurasia!

You think the English language would become Europe's if a superstate was formed? Hmm, I'm not so sure. There are far more German speakers (first language) in th EU than English speakers. I'll also think you'll find that the French, in the current political climate, have less love for the English than the Germans. If the EU was federalized I think they would keep on all the original languages as official in the member 'states'.

Yes, I do.
As for the number of German speakers, I think you'll find the number of English speakers is far higher. (Albeit as a second language).

Ah, true. But the French can't promote their own (it'll never fly), and as the saying goes: A frenchman and a german meet. They speak english. :)

Keep them all? Have you ever tried to convert Polish into Italian? How about Portugese into Welsh? It's a nice idea, but totally ineffective, as the EU has discovered.

LOL!!! New Zealand as a Major Planetary Economy! Yay! We had a 1.6 Billion dollar surplus this year and apparently cannot afford tax-cuts/don't want tax cuts.
Our finance minister is a penis.

Maybe so, but NZ *is* the 58th biggest economy on Earth, out of 230 (by GDP/PPP). That's a major economy that speaks English. :)

Why would only English have to be the official language? I agree that each country would probably keep their language as the official one and in the constitution just have it that there's more than one.

In South Africa for example there are 11 official languages. So Europe can do the same.

If I drive a Hummer H1 there is no effect on gas prices. If the entire state of California started driving only Hummer H1s...

Moral of the story: What works on a small scale may not work on a big scale.

Also, in SA, the languages aren't consigned to seperate states. (Ie: Free State isn't just English vs. Limpopo isn't just Tsonga.)

When that day comes I'll be packin my bags and fleeing to the US. Preserve the British identity!!

You're quite welcome to. We've even left Boston more or less the way you left it to us... small winding streets, traffic circles and lots of Irish. :D

It's something I've noticed a lot, and I felt like taking a sounding.

How many of you (European citizens only, I'm afraid) are annoyed by people referring to "Europe" and "Europeans" as though it/they were one entity/homogenous group.

i WOULD BE IF i WAS A EUROPEAN... Sorry. Caps lock.

I quite like being called european, it makes me feel more cultured in a country full of thugs! lol

Yes. I hate being lumped together with other people - however that probably stems from the fact that I'm a twin and therefore get so many people who seem to think that we're the same people that I hate anything that puts me together.
Also 'Europeans' don't all act the same, speak the same, have the same politics, constitutions etc, so how can you say that we're the same? That's like me saying that all Americans are fat and spend their lives eating burgers and drinking booze. (And that was not a veiled insult, in case some really geeky person leaps in!)

I quite like being called european, it makes me feel more cultured in a country full of thugs! lol
Same here.

I like being European though the British Imperialism never gets old

Also makes ignorant foreigners think I have crazy orgy’s all night which is never a bad thing

I prefer it the way it is now:

English, French and German are the official languages. You have to know at least two to be able to communicate with everyone.

Wait, no, I was wrong there. There used to be twelve official languages. I believe there are about twenty two now. It's never been an issue before, why would it be an issue now?

And then you have national languages.

There are 20 official languages, with Irish coming onboard soon. You don't think it cumbersome to have to have all documents rewritten, or for the EU to have Czech-to-Greek translators on hand? :(

EU translation to cost €800 million in 2006; Irish language translation to add to additional costs of €30 million in 2007; 1,324,231 pages translated in 2005
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10005657.shtml
...why waste over $1 Billion USD a year for something like that?

Here's some other interesting stats:
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/languages/index_en.html#Official%20eu

The languages of EU 15
According to a Eurobarometer study the official languages of the Union are spoken as mother tongues by the following percentages of the population of the European Union:

Deutsch 24%
Français 16%
English 16%
Italiano 16%
Español 11%
Nederlands 6%

Foreign language skills in the European Union
(columns - 1 2 3)
Language Proportion of population of the EU speaking it as a mother tongue
Proportion of population of the EU speaking it NOT as a mother tongue Total proportion speaking this language
Deutsch 24% 8% 32%
Français 16% 12% 28%
English 16% 31% 47%
Italiano 16% 2% 18%
Español 11% 4% 15%
Nederlands 6% 1% 7%

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/languages/images/foreignlanguages1.gif

...half of Europe already speaks English. Make it the default language of the EU and be done with it.

I'm not saying force people to speak only English, or to put down another language. But for the state to function, it needs a default form of communication.

I tend to agree, but as we are speaking about highly technical language, that might be a problem.

Ill refer to Europeans by country if Europeans refer to Americans by state/province.
Its pretty obvious that everybody here realizes that Mississippi and California are vastly different cultures, hell, they nearly speak different languages. So if you call Americans Arizonians, Oregonians, Nova Scotians, North Westonians, etc. etc., Ill be happy and call Europeans British, French, Serbian, and even Andorran. So what would you call somebody from Luxembourge? Luxemburger sounds like something you would find in a German McDonalds.

There are a fair number of Esperantists ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto ) in the massive organisation of European interpreters who favour Esperanto being used as the official language for documents as such. From Esperanto it is then easy to translate into any of the languages spoken by any given politician. It would be a marked improvement from the current situation where the information an MEP receives could have been translated up to half a dozen time. And the standard criticism of auxlangs that they are culturally devoid and poetically lacking is unimportant when you consider that it is used only to write documents as dull as the European Constitution Treaty.

Also, I enjoy being called a European. For all of the reasons previously mentioned and more!!!

Ill refer to Europeans by country if Europeans refer to Americans by state/province.
Its pretty obvious that everybody here realizes that Mississippi and California are vastly different cultures, hell, they nearly speak different languages. So if you call Americans Arizonians, Oregonians, Nova Scotians, North Westonians, etc. etc., Ill be happy and call Europeans British, French, Serbian, and even Andorran. So what would you call somebody from Luxembourge? Luxemburger sounds like something you would find in a German McDonalds.

Um... what? I'm from Connecticut and have been to 37 states. I've never had to whip out a "Nutmegger to Coloradan" dictionary. :confused:

From Esperanto it is then easy to translate into any of the languages spoken by any given politician.
Except languages that aren't latin based like Finnish.

I like being called an European. It doesn't sound to me like I would be like anyone from the next country. Being an European means being from one of the many cultures. It doesn't really work as a label.

There are a fair number of Esperantists ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto ) in the massive organisation of European interpreters who favour Esperanto being used as the official language for documents as such. From Esperanto it is then easy to translate into any of the languages spoken by any given politician. It would be a marked improvement from the current situation where the information an MEP receives could have been translated up to half a dozen time. And the standard criticism of auxlangs that they are culturally devoid and poetically lacking is unimportant when you consider that it is used only to write documents as dull as the European Constitution Treaty.

Also, I enjoy being called a European. For all of the reasons previously mentioned and more!!!

So... instead of getting things mostly right going from German to Italian, you want to go German-Esperanto-Italian?!?

Try that here and see what you get: http://www.tashian.com/multibabel/

I typed in:
{Original English Text:}
I think going through a third language is a good idea!

Translated to French:
Je pense que passante par un troisième langage est une bonne idée !

Translated back to English:
I think that busy by a third language is a good idea!

...somehow, an Esperanto middleware component doesn't look too useable to me. :D

I'm first Norwegian, then Scandinavian, then Nordic, then European, then human. However in these times "european" is becoming more and more empty, I think. If Turkey becomes an EU member and hence "european" (!!), I wouldnt consider myself european anymore.

I'm first Norwegian, then Scandinavian, then Nordic, then European, then human. However in these times "european" is becoming more and more empty, I think. If Turkey becomes an EU member and hence "european" (!!), I wouldnt consider myself european anymore.

Well, Israel gets into Eurovision...

I just say EU superstate (Lind of like Switzerland) and be done with it.

...somehow, an Esperanto middleware component doesn't look too useable to me.

Yeah, but you'd use decent human translators, not computers which never, ever, work properly. I'd just use Esperanto, or preferably Latin as a purely neutral legal auxiliary language used when different translations of a law could disagree, so a auxillary one would have supremacy.

Well, I say Europe and European to generalize the continent and the people living there as a whole. However I will refer to a particular culture/country to be more specific since theres just so many places in Europe.

I.E.: I'd like to travel to Europe next year and eat sauerkrauts with Germans, and eat Swedish berries with Swedes. :p

How many of you (European citizens only, I'm afraid) are annoyed by people referring to "Europe" and "Europeans" as though it/they were one entity/homogenous group.

Well the question is rather ambiguous, but I imagine there are several provisos that form the thrust of your question…

Does Europe exist, yes it does….

In what form does Europe exist,:

Europe exists as a geographical area and as a legislative body (a group of nations), both of which are obviously not entirely the same.

Is a European someone that lives within the geographical area or someone who subscribes to the values of their legislative body, or from a nation that aspires to be part of the legislative body….

e.g. many former Russia governed countries aspire to be part of the European Union, due to the nature and advantages of membership, as mentioned in an above thread, namely for economical reasons. However this aspiration allows member states to leverage and promote areas like human rights, democracy, in a manner (due to the EU being a collaboration between many countries which have historically different interests) using a more balanced methodology than say for example the US when dealing with S.America, which obviously has issues related the to the electoral system, and balances and checks in congress over executive power). This allows the EU to develop and promote a more tangible values oriented leaning using this collaborative approach where the national economic interest becomes less of an issue as a fairer playing field for economic interest is developed. Even though we are all aware that national interest sometimes governs motivations, which are masked in values.

The EU also has more leverage when dealing with incumbents and prospective nations in terms of law and trade than the UN, who due to the size of membership, the geo-political divides, and the unwillingness of some nations to uphold “international law” when it does not tally with their interest.

I think if Europe (or indeed being European) was strengthened, and the above and below are very simplistic arguments due to time and space limitations, we would have found that;

1. it would have been more difficult to start the iraq war without a stronger consensus.
2. the environment that created 9/11 7/7 and the Madrid bombings would not have happened in the way it did; e.g. to polarize without insightful dialogue.
3. the scaling back in the “western world” of our freedoms and a democracy informed by a free media would have been more difficult, due to their not being a “clear and present” threat from outside, a threat exasperated by the “guardians of democracy and freedom”.

Yes I think there is such a thing as a European, maybe being a European gives us another chance to recreate the IDEA, with a greater insight and the tools of dialogue and much more experience.

Um... what? I'm from Connecticut and have been to 37 states. I've never had to whip out a "Nutmegger to Coloradan" dictionary. :confused:
Im refering to the fact that a person in Alabama would use different words and phrases than a person in New York. Just as a person from America would get confused in England when he was told that his room was on the first floor of a building, or would want to know why his English friend was 'pissed'.

Well, Israel gets into Eurovision...

I just say EU superstate (Lind of like Switzerland) and be done with it.



Yeah, but you'd use decent human translators, not computers which never, ever, work properly. I'd just use Esperanto, or preferably Latin as a purely neutral legal auxiliary language used when different translations of a law could disagree, so a auxillary one would have supremacy.

Israel gets into eurovision because they are desperate to find viewers. Eurovision is a joke anyways....

There are 20 official languages, with Irish coming onboard soon. You don't think it cumbersome to have to have all documents rewritten, or for the EU to have Czech-to-Greek translators on hand? :(

EU translation to cost €800 million in 2006; Irish language translation to add to additional costs of €30 million in 2007; 1,324,231 pages translated in 2005
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10005657.shtml
...why waste over $1 Billion USD a year for something like that?

It's not really a waste at all. Having quite complicated concepts translated properly is extremely important, especially in something like politics and economics.

I'm not saying force people to speak only English, or to put down another language. But for the state to function, it needs a default form of communication.
I disagree. English might well be spoken by 47% of people as a second or third language, but if you start putting every document in English, then at least half of the EU member states' citizens can't understand at all, and other than the 16% of native speakers, everyone else is going to have problems too.

When 84% of people can't get the exact, precise meaning of a document when all of them are affected by it then it's a waste to have them printed in the same language.

(the UK *ISNT* a country,

That's funny, the Prime Ministers office (http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page823.asp) seems to disagree. Countries within a country. Ergo, the UK is a country.

Israel gets into eurovision because they are desperate to find viewers. Eurovision is a joke anyways....
I know. A white, NorwayVision song contest, broadcast to Christian countries in Western Europe, with devices blocking any immigrants' televisions from viewing it, singing cultural songs about ethnic purity would be way cooler, no?

I know. A white, NorwayVision song contest, broadcast to Christian countries in Western Europe, with devices blocking any immigrants' televisions from viewing it, singing cultural songs about ethnic purity would be way cooler, no?
In fairness, the eurovision is a joke.

I'm a European and I see nothing wrong in it. We are both nationals of our respective nations and citizens of the EU.

Go Europe! I live in the UK, and by being called a European i get to take credit for France and Germany and Spain. It would probably bother me more if I came from Old Europe. But doesnt it bother Americans when they are called "Americans" rather than Texans or New Yorkers?

Go Europe! I live in the UK, and by being called a European i get to take credit for France and Germany and Spain. It would probably bother me more if I came from Old Europe. But doesnt it bother Americans when they are called "Americans" rather than Texans or New Yorkers?
I don't care so much about the other countries in the EU, as much as for what the EU itself represents. If it one day succeeds in its vision, I will be proud to call myself a European.

Maybe so, but NZ *is* the 58th biggest economy on Earth, out of 230 (by GDP/PPP). That's a major economy that speaks English. :)

It's sometimes surprising to find out how small some countries are. I never realized that my own state had over twice the population and about 3 times the GDP of New Zealand. I've been to a number of smaller countries, but sometimes it just doesn't sink in that many states are larger than many countries.

Im refering to the fact that a person in Alabama would use different words and phrases than a person in New York. Just as a person from America would get confused in England when he was told that his room was on the first floor of a building, or would want to know why his English friend was 'pissed'.

Ah, but that's slang you're referring to, not language.

If I walk up to somebody in Nevada and ask them "Where is the package store?", they'll send me to UPS or Mailboxes Etc. or something. In Connecticut, they'll send me to the liquor store.

However, it's STILL American English. If I asked either where I can buy rubbers, there is no question what I'm asking for, vs. in London.

I'll grant there are some regional langauges in the US such as Creole in parts of Louisiana and such, but US English is pretty standardized.

It's sometimes surprising to find out how small some countries are. I never realized that my own state had over twice the population and about 3 times the GDP of New Zealand. I've been to a number of smaller countries, but sometimes it just doesn't sink in that many states are larger than many countries.

Yep. That's very true. Texas is bigger than France by 2 Scotlands, for example.

Even my own Connecticut (#48 by size) could be a player in the EU: it is three times the size of Luxembourg, and has 13 times the population!

It's not really a waste at all. Having quite complicated concepts translated properly is extremely important, especially in something like politics and economics.

I disagree. English might well be spoken by 47% of people as a second or third language, but if you start putting every document in English, then at least half of the EU member states' citizens can't understand at all, and other than the 16% of native speakers, everyone else is going to have problems too.

When 84% of people can't get the exact, precise meaning of a document when all of them are affected by it then it's a waste to have them printed in the same language.

I didn't say that there should be no translation at all, but rather that there needs to be streamlining/a common default tongue.
Having to translate everything all the time is a huge time sink, and one of which will keep Europe divided.

Over time, cultural identities die out. There are no Romans left, no Etruscians, no Visigoths, etc.
The EU is trying to foster ethnicities to survive where amalgamation is historicially a necessity.
While there are of course exceptions (Basques, Slovaks, etc), there are many others that have not (Manx comes to mind, though the UK has "revived" the language).
I don't think it's going to work in the long term.

Well Europe isn't a nation for a start and I and believe that the older members of the EU (France, Germany, UK, Netherlands ect.) wish to remain independent of Brussels.

I considered myself a YellaBelly then English Then British

I thought Americans believed Britain to be an island floating roughly half-way between America and Europe... is this no longer true?

I thought Americans believed Britain to be an island floating roughly half-way between America and Europe... is this no longer true?

Well, I don't know about that, but I do consider London to be a strange suburb of Boston where people use different currency and drive on the wrong side of the road... ;)

Stop calling me American then.

MayslandingNewjersian is my proper title and even that is a tad generic and stereotpyical. I wonder if Turkish people are called Europeans...

Yep. That's very true. Texas is bigger than France by 2 Scotlands, for example.

Even my own Connecticut (#48 by size) could be a player in the EU: it is three times the size of Luxembourg, and has 13 times the population!

And my own Michigan has about the same population and GDP as Belgium.

Hmm.. I understand why one could be annoyed.

I'm struggling to word my explanation here.
I'll use Europeans only when I can't use a singular term like 'British' or 'French'.

I was born in England of English parents, although two of my great grand parents were Irish and somewhere even further back there is a Belgian. My sister lives in France and her children have been fully educated in France - they see them selves as part French - part British. Although I wouldn't like to guess at whatever percentages ...

Am I European? Yep I sure am. It would be very difficult for me to deny my heritage and my family ... I even worked in Italy for a while

Am I English? Well I will be supporting England vociferously in the world cup and have been following the test match score. Yep. I sure am.

Am I British / UKian what ever we want to call it? Yep. I supported GB at the Olympics, looked at buying businesses in Scotland and Wales, worked in Belfast and Edinburgh - cheer on Scots, Irish and Welsh teams in matches (even against other Europeans) - so yes - I have an element of Britishness as well as being English and European.

Can I cope with all those things at the same time? Well I have done so far ...

------------------

Oh - and for the American who wanted us to refer to all Americans according to which state they come from I will be quite pleased to do that. However, please make it easy for us, ditch the American passport and reintroduce passports for your individual states. :) and while you are doing it, please can you recall George Bush and his cronies?

Seriously though - My wife is American - which state do you want me to use for her? The one she was born in? The one where she spent her childhood? The one where most of her family live now? They are all different. Maybe she should choose one of the other states she lived in? Nope - America is one big super state. Sure, there are differences between the states, but then there are just as big differences between the English counties of Yorkshire and Kent.

Personally - I think we will get a larger, more influential state of Europe. I think we will need to, if Europe is going to any voice at all in world affairs. With out it - The various European countries will become bit players as China, Russia, and India all start to flex their muscles. If we want to have any real influence in 70-100 years time - it will be as a combined Europe.

I once met someone while travelling who believed the UK was cheating in the world cup as England Scotland and Wales all enter seprately- 'cos there all just the same country, right?'Wrong, they are a union of countries.

Meh. Hopefully one day Europe will be a giant country and it will be a non issue.

That wouldn't work out. If there is ever another World War in Europe, it'll probably have something to do with the EU issue (partly).

Wrong, they are a union of countries.
A union of kingdoms, one could say! :p

I don't think his inferior geographically challenged brain can handle all the extra information! HAWHAHWAHAWHLOLOLOLROFL!!!! (sorry bout the stereotype.)

I don't see whats wrong with non-"europeans" calling "europeans" by their rightful names. I call English English, and Germans Germans. Theres no harm in that. Its like calling everyone from South America (Brazillians, Venezuelians, Chileans, Argentinians, Bolivians, Peruvians etc...) South Americans.

Im all for calling Brits Brits and so on.

Then it shouldnt be a problem for you to call Texans Hoosiers Sooners Oregonians NoDaks and the rest by their proper names either. Sorted.

A union of kingdoms, one could say! :p

Ship of fools?

Being an American, I can't help but interrupt-- we can't very well go around saying, "Brits/Swedes/French/Spanish/Germans/Norwegians/Dutch/Austrians/Latvians etc."

And that's my two cents (which is, admittedly, rather devalued against the euro, but that's life)
If you want to call me European, I'll call you USian. Fair?

It's sometimes surprising to find out how small some countries are. I never realized that my own state had over twice the population and about 3 times the GDP of New Zealand. I've been to a number of smaller countries, but sometimes it just doesn't sink in that many states are larger than many countries.
Yup. The US is the third largest country in the world, both in population and area, and it's the biggest economy by far. That means that most other countries will look ridiculously small by comparision.

That's why one looks at things on a per capita basis, to be able to make better comparisions.

Yup. The US is the third largest country in the world, both in population and area, and it's the biggest economy by far. That means that most other countries will look ridiculously small by comparision.

That's why one looks at things on a per capita basis, to be able to make better comparisions.

Per capita, America doesnt have the best economy.

Then it shouldnt be a problem for you to call Texans Hoosiers Sooners Oregonians NoDaks and the rest by their proper names either. Sorted.

So long as you call people from the UK - Tykes, Scousers, Geordies, Cockneys etc. I am sure that the same type of regional names apply within other European nations as well, so you will have to learn those.

In situations where it would be appropiate to use the //// it would indeed not be practical. Can you however think of something where it would be needed ? Excluding thinking Bush is an idiot of course.


WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CALLING EUROPEANS EUROPEANS HERE. can somebody please explain to me why bush bashing even fits into this category. because i cant really seem to understand.

I thought Americans believed Britain to be an island floating roughly half-way between America and Europe... is this no longer true?


yeah...your pretty much wrong...wer're not dumbasses.

So long as you call people from the UK - Tykes, Scousers, Geordies, Cockneys etc. I am sure that the same type of regional names apply within other European nations as well, so you will have to learn those.

I already do.

South of the Equator, West of Greenwich, Portuguese speaking countryman.

I already do.
For the rest of Europe too (or Western Asia, whatever it's being called in this thread)?

If you want to call me European, I'll call you USian. Fair?

USian? Thats OK by me as long as I can call you a Norwooky

Ill refer to Europeans by country if Europeans refer to Americans by state/province.
Its pretty obvious that everybody here realizes that Mississippi and California are vastly different cultures, hell, they nearly speak different languages. So if you call Americans Arizonians, Oregonians, Nova Scotians, North Westonians, etc. etc., Ill be happy and call Europeans British, French, Serbian, and even Andorran. So what would you call somebody from Luxembourge? Luxemburger sounds like something you would find in a German McDonalds.


OMG WHEN DID NOVA SCOTIA AND THE NORTH WEST TERRITORIES BECOME STATES?????? Im soooo overjoyed!!!!


...idiot.

For the rest of Europe too (or Western Asia, whatever it's being called in this thread)?

You are the only one referring to them here. I dont have time to type all that crap, and shedloads of them cry if they are called Europeans. Easier to not think or talk about them than to suffer all the wailings.

OMG WHEN DID NOVA SCOTIA AND THE NORTH WEST TERRITORIES BECOME STATES?????? Im soooo overjoyed!!!!

The poster did write "state/province," so you should use as applicable.
(Although the NorthWest Territories is neither, but it wasn't nearly the point, so meh)

You are the only one referring to them here. I dont have time to type all that crap, and shedloads of them cry if they are called Europeans. Easier to not think or talk about them than to suffer all the wailings.
But I like the wailings! Anyway, they only wail when they're all thought of as a single homogeneous entity, without recognizing regional and local differences.

On the other hand, it's kind of stupid to assume that just because one refers to "Europeans" one does not recognize those differences.

Yup. The US is the third largest country in the world, both in population and area, and it's the biggest economy by far. That means that most other countries will look ridiculously small by comparision.

That's why one looks at things on a per capita basis, to be able to make better comparisions.

When I said "my state" I wasn't referring to the US as a whole (as the US is not a "state" in this sense, but a union of states), I was referring to the state of Michigan.

As for GDP per capita (by PPP) Michigan it at USD 36,833, which would put it between Iceland and Ireland at #5. However, Michigan only ranks 29th within the US on GDP per capita. Damned recession.

Seriously though - My wife is American - which state do you want me to use for her? The one she was born in? The one where she spent her childhood? The one where most of her family live now? They are all different. Maybe she should choose one of the other states she lived in? Nope - America is one big super state. Sure, there are differences between the states, but then there are just as big differences between the English counties of Yorkshire and Kent.

Actually, you'll find that a number of us identify with our state at least as much as we do with the United States. And some of us (more than many people think, I'd wager) with our states more than the US as a whole. Even those of us who aren't even remotely "Southern".

Oh - and for the American who wanted us to refer to all Americans according to which state they come from I will be quite pleased to do that. However, please make it easy for us, ditch the American passport and reintroduce passports for your individual states. and while you are doing it, please can you recall George Bush and his cronies?


Some of us would certainly love to. I seriously question the need for a United States in it's current incarnation, but that's another matter for another thread.

Also, I'm certain I remember seeing EU passports the last time I went to Germany.

When I said "my state" I wasn't referring to the US as a whole (as the US is not a "state" in this sense, but a union of states), I was referring to the state of Michigan.

As for GDP per capita (by PPP) Michigan it at USD 36,833, which would put it between Iceland and Ireland at #5. However, Michigan only ranks 29th within the US on GDP per capita. Damned recession.
The whole is big, the parts are big. The US is pretty damn big no matter how you slice it.

I think that nowadays the US is more a "state" in the traditional sense than it used to be, but that's besides the point.

Ive heard being annoyed with french & french canadians
but Europe in general? at least name a country wow a culture SOMETHING
the entire continent?!!

The whole is big, the parts are big. The US is pretty damn big no matter how you slice it.

I think that nowadays the US is more a "state" in the traditional sense than it used to be, but that's besides the point.

True, the US is slowly becoming more of a "state" every year, but it's not quite there yet. I wish it wouldn't get there, but I'm not remotely optimistic enough to think that it won't.

Anyway, the reason it's sometimes a shock to realize how big the states are, is that here we're told that there is a huge difference between a "state" and a "country" and that the "state" is a subdivision of a country, and as such is very small and highly dependent on being part of that country. The vast majority of Americans believe that the states would be far too small to operate as proper countries, when that is very much not the case.

The vast majority of Americans believe that the states would be far too small to operate as proper countries, when that is very much not the case.

I tremble at the thought of the military power of the Vermont Republic...

Per capita, America doesnt have the best economy.

Yeah, but what has Luxembourg ever done for anyone? ;)

Yeah, but what has Luxembourg ever done for anyone? ;)

They left the rest of the world alone and did not impose their laws because they think their the only ones who are right, and the rest of the world, is wrong.

I dont mean to sound like a basher or even ungrateful. I know the US did its share of good to the world. You cant, however, play God like the US is some angel who came from the sky to save us all.

I'm not sure about this last bit but, i think Luxembourg has at least donated money and resources to a few good humanitarian causes. Not to mention, their money in a total, isnt that much, its just huge per capita, because they know how to manage themselves and their small country.

Yeah, but what has Luxembourg ever done for anyone? ;)
Cheese! :D

Europeans should start refering to Americans properly as Oregonians/Californians/New Yorkers/Floridians/&etc

I'm not really annoyed at all. I believe myself a European. Its just the damned french that spoil things.

I don't mind being called European it just annoys me when people say Britain and then refer to all British people as English. Ugh.

They left the rest of the world alone and did not impose their laws because they think their the only ones who are right, and the rest of the world, is wrong.

I dont mean to sound like a basher or even ungrateful. I know the US did its share of good to the world. You cant, however, play God like the US is some angel who came from the sky to save us all.

I'm not sure about this last bit but, i think Luxembourg has at least donated money and resources to a few good humanitarian causes. Not to mention, their money in a total, isnt that much, its just huge per capita, because they know how to manage themselves and their small country.

Yeah, but that's any power, anytime. The same arguement was made against the UK, France, Rome, etc. It's nothing new. Maybe the US doesn't do the best thing 100% of the time, but it has done more good than ill to date.

The US also donates more than any other nation on Earth. We just don't do all of it out of our national coffers.

My mother is from northern Germany, my father is from western Austria, one of my grandgrandfathers was polish (it had been under austrian rule that time), a grandgrandmother was from the Netherlands, one from Spain. One grandgrandmother was from northern Italy.
I have the citizenship of Austria and Germany. I am not a european citizen, because there is no European constitution. I have read the text of the European constitution at the moment it was available and I think that it would be great to have realised most of the points of it.
Example: My mother lives in Austria since 1976 and isn't allowed to vote. She is allowed to vote in German elections. The european constitution would have made it possible to vote in the country YOU LIVE IN, what seem to be quite more rational.
So I am nearly a European from that point of view.

But I am loosing the red thread.

Genetically I am definately european.
Concerning the value of a human beeing, I make no difference between anyone on this planet. [That's because I don't know, which ideas and ways of living will be the right ones to help our species to survive the next millions of years (or even be the base of hundrets of new species). If we become extinct it may be, because we have become to homogenous. Diversity is the only way to survive]. So I am a Homo sapiens sapiens.

My cultural roots are deeply based in my region (Tyrol). A region I love and I enthuse about when I am talking about it to someone who doesn't know it. I like to return to my origin and I miss it when I am somewhere else for more then half a year.
So I am definately a TYROLEAN.

Then I am a EUROPEAN. First because I don't have a problem to share "my" region with people from somewhere else (it doesn't matter from where in the world they are). Second because I have been to most european countries and have met and spoken to people from nearly everywhere and I got the impression, that many young people of my generation would like to draw a definate line between the hate in the past and the present situation. And many of our values are equal. One of them (one of the most important I think) is the love for diversity in everything.

So it is for me: Homo sapiens sapiens, Tyrolean, European.

I don't have a problem, if someone calls me a European, as long as it isn't about a characteristic, that definately is NOT typical for those who see themselves as Europeans.
I think there are many people in Europe, who don't like to be called Europeans and who aren't Europeans in the way I understand it. If someone lives where his ancestors lived and all his aspects of life are in his region, and if he doesn't care about anything outside his region, and if he is strictly against cultural influences from outside, he is not a European. I think one has the right to think like that even if it isn't my way of thinking.

Another point: If something is (seems to be) typical for one people in Europe, it doesn't mean that it is typical for all Europeans! f.e.: Only because there are countries where the use of "soft drugs" is legal, it doesn't mean that all Europeans are happy with that.

Concerning languages:
Tyrol is a region of Austria, you can drive through from north to south in an hour and in two hours you are through it from the west to the east. So it is very little in terms of a Texan (I have been to Texas with my class some years ago. We landed in Fort Worth and were taken to our hostfamilies by car. After half an hour drive I dared to ask how far it is to McKinney (that's where we lived and went to school for two weeks). I was told that it isn't far. I think we arrived about an hour later. People looked unbelieving at me, when I told them, that "not far" means 5 to 10 minutes of walking for me).

It (Tyrol) is placed in the Alps. The official language is German. Nearly every village has is own dialect. Just because two valleys are next to each other doesn't mean, that they can understand each other properly. In the North, Tyrol borders to Bavaria. Dozends of other dialects are spoken there. South of Tyrol there is Italy. In the Northern part there are three official languages: German, Italian and Valaisian. West of Tyrol there is a region that is called Vorarlberg. The people there speak sort of a latemedieval german. In all those parts German is spoken as the official language for quite a time, but it didn't cause the lokal languages to disappear (it is helpful for those who live there to interact with those from other regions/valleys/villages). For some German is sort of a foreign language. So there is already a huge diversity in this little region. And I think that it isn't different in other parts of Europe.
So: If English would become "the" official language in Europe, it would definately not become everydays language.

Another argument (call it typical european if you want to) is, that there is a rich cultural life in every language. My hair stands up on my back at the thought that there could come the day, when someone who grew up in Germany finds a book of Goethe and can't read it, because it isn't written in English! Or french people shaking there heads in missunderstanding, because someone is singing chansons in French!

I agree that it is important to have one global language concernig sciences and I think English is precise enough for that. But like Latin wasn't everydays language in Europe in the Middle Ages, English will not be too.

By the way: I think any language that is spoken in large parts of the world will evolute to a number of "lokal" languages over time, like Latin did (French, Italian, Spanish languages, Portugese). So a spoken "world language" may be a nice idea, but is unrealizable. It may be realizable in written texts. (China uses one "set of signs" as written language, but there are several spoken languages in China. Everyone can read everything even if the writer uses totally different "sounds" for the sign than the reader).


One more thing that just popped to my mind concerning "typical european":
The time of the Enlightenment lead to a change in the ways of thinking on the european continent (including Russia). Well educated Europeans tried to answer the question, what reality is and -most important- if reality is what we perceive. The essence of their thoughts (and experiments) has been, that something doesn't necessarily exist, just because someone says/writes it. Believing in logic and rationalism, they said, that there is a reason for everything and that things like luck, chance and gods will don't exist. If there is no proof or counterproof for something (logic is good, experimental proof is better), it is as probable that it exists as it doesn't exist. They said, that the most important thing is, to question everything.
Those ideas have been disseminated very well but they are weakened today - unfortunately.
Many Europeans didn't think constructivistic (=because it is said that it is like it seems to be, it is like that) for many decades. Lack of time and the permanent influence of unreflected media weakens the critical philosophy.

Examples:
1. Axis of evil. What does evil mean? Who has the authority to decide what is evil and what is not? Is there a proof for the good-evil concept or are there other possibilities which are of equal probability?
Is there proof, that something like an axis of evil really exists?
How can someone fight an axis of evil, without having answers to the questions above?!

2. European constitution, Yes or No.
What is written in it? Why is it written in it? What would be the alternatives? Who is pro, who is con, why? Can I identify myself with the arguments of someone who is pro/con? Why?
After answering those questions, one may discuss his opinion and vote for or against it. I am sure that most Europeans who used their possibility to vote for or against the european constitution haven't read a line of it. They used the votes to show their opinion about their "local" governments. :mad:

So I don't think that the label "critical" is typical european any more, but to have the feeling to be more critical about everything than others (f.e. "US Americans") is typical. (Like I proofed with my far to long know-(it-)all post :LOL:).

I hope, my English isn't too confusing and I will get your opinions about my disordered thoughts...

I tremble at the thought of the military power of the Vermont Republic...


and god forbid we get attacked by...gasp...the iowa milita. AHHHHHH!!!!!

Why don't you ask the same question to Africans?

Oh, and by the way, a lot of Europeans refer to THEMSELVES as Europeans.