Is This Country Crazy?
Inquiring Minds Elsewhere Want to Know
By Ann Jones
January 11, 2015 "ICH"
- Americans who live abroad -- more than
six million of us worldwide (not
counting those who work for the U.S.
government) -- often face hard questions
about our country from people we live among.
Europeans, Asians, and Africans ask us to
explain everything that baffles them about
the increasingly odd and troubling conduct
of the United States. Polite people,
normally reluctant to risk offending a
guest, complain that America’s
trigger-happiness, cutthroat
free-marketeering, and “exceptionality” have
gone on for too long to be considered just
an adolescent phase. Which means that we
Americans abroad are regularly asked to
account for the behavior of our rebranded
“homeland,” now conspicuously in
decline and increasingly
out of step with the rest of the world.
In my long nomadic life, I’ve
had the good fortune to live, work, or
travel in all but a handful of countries on
this planet. I’ve been to both poles and a
great many places in between, and nosy as I
am, I’ve talked with people all along the
way. I still remember a time when to be an
American was to be envied. The country where
I grew up after World War II seemed to be
respected and admired around the world for
way too many reasons to go into here.
That’s changed, of course.
Even after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, I
still met people -- in the Middle East, no
less -- willing to withhold judgment on the
U.S. Many thought that the Supreme Court’s
installation of George W. Bush as
president was a blunder American voters
would correct in the election of 2004. His
return to office truly spelled the end
of America as the world had known it. Bush
had started a war, opposed by the entire
world, because he wanted to and he could. A
majority of Americans supported him. And
that was when all the uncomfortable
questions really began.
In the early fall of 2014,
I traveled from my home in Oslo, Norway,
through much of Eastern and Central Europe.
Everywhere I went in those two months,
moments after locals realized I was an
American the questions started and, polite
as they usually were, most of them had a
single underlying theme: Have Americans gone
over the edge? Are you crazy? Please
explain.
Then recently, I traveled
back to the “homeland.” It struck me there
that most Americans have no idea just how
strange we now seem to much of the world. In
my experience, foreign observers are far
better informed about us than the average
American is about them. This is partly
because the “news” in the American media is
so parochial and so limited in its views
both of how we act and how other countries
think -- even countries with which we were
recently, are currently, or threaten soon to
be at war. America’s belligerence alone, not
to mention its financial acrobatics, compels
the rest of the world to keep close track of
us. Who knows, after all, what conflict the
Americans may drag you into next, as target
or reluctant ally?
So wherever we expatriates
settle on the planet, we find someone who
wants to talk about the latest American
events, large and small: another country
bombed in the name of our
“national security,” another peaceful
protest march
attacked by our increasingly
militarized police, another
diatribe against “big government” by yet
another wannabe candidate who hopes to head
that very government in Washington. Such
news leaves foreign audiences puzzled and
full of trepidation.
Question Time
Take the questions
stumping Europeans in the Obama years (which
1.6 million Americans residing in Europe
regularly find thrown our way). At the
absolute top of the list: “Why would anyone
oppose national health care?” European
and other industrialized countries have had
some form of
national health care since the 1930s or
1940s, Germany since 1880. Some versions,
as in France and Great Britain, have
devolved into two-tier public and private
systems. Yet even the privileged who pay
for a faster track would not begrudge their
fellow citizens government-funded
comprehensive health care. That so many
Americans do strikes Europeans as
baffling, if not frankly brutal.
In the Scandinavian
countries, long considered to be the most
socially advanced in the world, a
national (physical and mental) health
program, funded by the state, is a big part
-- but only a part -- of a more general
social welfare system. In Norway, where I
live, all citizens also have an equal right
to
education (state subsidized
preschool from age one, and free schools
from age six through specialty training or
university education and beyond),
unemployment benefits, job-placement and
paid retraining services, paid parental
leave,
old age pensions, and more. These
benefits are not merely an emergency “safety
net”; that is, charitable payments
grudgingly bestowed upon the needy. They
are universal: equally available to all
citizens as human rights encouraging social
harmony -- or as our own U.S. constitution
would put it, “domestic tranquility.” It’s
no wonder that, for many years,
international evaluators have ranked Norway
as the best place to
grow old, to
be a woman, and to
raise a child. The title of “best” or
“happiest” place to live on Earth comes down
to a neighborly contest among Norway and the
other Nordic social democracies, Sweden,
Denmark, Finland, and Iceland.
In Norway, all benefits
are paid for mainly by
high taxation. Compared to the
mind-numbing enigma of the U.S. tax code,
Norway’s is remarkably straightforward,
taxing income from labor and pensions
progressively, so that those with higher
incomes pay more. The tax department does
the calculations, sends an annual bill, and
taxpayers, though free to dispute the sum,
willingly pay up, knowing what they and
their children get in return. And because
government policies effectively redistribute
wealth and tend to narrow the country’s slim
income gap, most Norwegians sail pretty
comfortably in the same boat. (Think about
that!)
Life and Liberty
This system didn’t just
happen. It was planned. Sweden led the way
in the 1930s, and all five Nordic countries
pitched in during the postwar period to
develop their own variations of what came to
be called the Nordic Model: a balance of
regulated capitalism, universal social
welfare, political democracy, and the
highest levels of
gender and economic equality on the
planet. It’s their system. They invented it.
They like it. Despite the efforts of an
occasional conservative government to muck
it up, they maintain it. Why?
In all the Nordic
countries, there is broad general agreement
across the political spectrum that only when
people’s basic needs are met -- when they
can cease to worry about their jobs, their
incomes, their housing, their
transportation, their health care, their
kids’ education, and their aging parents --
only then can they be free to do as they
like. While the U.S. settles for the fantasy
that, from birth, every kid has an equal
shot at the American dream, Nordic social
welfare systems lay the foundations for a
more authentic equality and individualism.
These ideas are not novel.
They are implied in the preamble to our own
Constitution. You know, the part about “we
the People” forming “a more perfect Union”
to “promote the general Welfare, and secure
the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and
our Posterity.” Even as he prepared the
nation for war, President Franklin D.
Roosevelt memorably specified components of
what that general welfare should be in his
State of the Union address in 1941. Among
the “simple basic things that must never be
lost sight of,” he
listed “equality of opportunity for
youth and others, jobs for those who can
work, security for those who need it, the
ending of special privileges for the few,
the preservation of civil liberties for
all,” and oh yes, higher taxes to pay for
those things and for the cost of defensive
armaments.
Knowing that Americans
used to support such ideas, a Norwegian
today is appalled to learn that a CEO of a
major American corporation
makes between 300 and 400 times as much
as its average employee. Or that governors
Sam Brownback of Kansas and Chris Christie
of New Jersey, having run up their state’s
debts by cutting taxes for the rich, now
plan to
cover the loss with money snatched from
the pension funds of workers in the public
sector. To a Norwegian, the job of
government is to distribute the country’s
good fortune reasonably equally, not send it
zooming upward, as in America today, to a
sticky-fingered one percent.
In their planning,
Norwegians tend to do things slowly, always
thinking of the long term, envisioning what
a better life might be for their children,
their posterity. That’s why a Norwegian, or
any northern European, is aghast to learn
that two-thirds of American college students
finish their education in the red, some
owing $100,000 or more. Or that in the
U.S., still the world’s richest country,
one in three children lives in poverty,
along with
one in five young people between the
ages of 18 and 34. Or that America’s recent
multi-trillion-dollar wars were fought
on a credit card to be paid off by our kids.
Which brings us back to that word: brutal.
Implications of brutality,
or of a kind of uncivilized inhumanity, seem
to lurk in so many other questions foreign
observers ask about America like: How could
you set up that concentration camp in Cuba,
and why can’t you shut it down? Or: How can
you pretend to be a Christian country and
still carry out the death penalty? The
follow-up to which often is: How could you
pick as president a man proud of executing
his fellow citizens at the
fastest rate recorded in Texas history?
(Europeans will not soon forget George W.
Bush.)
Other things I've had to
answer for include:
* Why can’t you Americans
stop interfering with women’s health care?
* Why can’t you understand
science?
* How can you still be so
blind to the reality of climate change?
* How can you speak of the
rule of law when your presidents break
international laws to make war whenever they
want?
* How can you hand over
the power to blow up the planet to one lone,
ordinary man?
* How can you throw away
the Geneva Conventions and your principles
to advocate torture?
* Why do you Americans
like guns so much? Why do you kill each
other at such a rate?
To many, the most baffling
and important question of all is: Why do you
send your military all over the world to
stir up more and more trouble for all of us?
That last question is
particularly pressing because countries
historically friendly to the United States,
from Australia to Finland, are struggling to
keep up with an influx of refugees from
America’s wars and interventions. Throughout
Western Europe and Scandinavia, right-wing
parties that have scarcely or never played a
role in government are now
rising rapidly on a wave of opposition
to long-established immigration policies.
Only last month, such a party almost
toppled the sitting social democratic
government of Sweden, a generous
country that has absorbed more than
its fair share of asylum seekers fleeing the
shock waves of “the
finest fighting force that the world has
ever known.”
The Way We Are
Europeans understand, as
it seems Americans do not, the intimate
connection between a country’s domestic and
foreign policies. They often trace America’s
reckless conduct abroad to its refusal to
put its own house in order. They’ve watched
the United States unravel its flimsy safety
net, fail to replace its decaying
infrastructure, disempower most of its
organized labor, diminish its
schools, bring its national legislature to a
standstill, and create the greatest degree
of economic and social inequality in
almost a century. They understand why
Americans, who have ever less personal
security and next to no social welfare
system, are becoming more anxious and
fearful. They understand as well why so many
Americans have lost trust in a government
that has done so little new for them over
the past three decades or more, except for
Obama’s endlessly
embattled health care effort, which
seems to most Europeans a pathetically
modest proposal.
What baffles so many of
them, though, is how ordinary Americans in
startling numbers have been persuaded to
dislike “big government” and yet support its
new representatives, bought and paid for by
the rich. How to explain that? In Norway’s
capital, where a statue of a contemplative
President Roosevelt overlooks the harbor,
many America-watchers think he may have been
the last U.S. president who understood and
could explain to the citizenry what
government might do for all of them.
Struggling Americans, having forgotten all
that, take aim at unknown enemies far away
-- or on the far side of their own towns.
It’s hard to know why we
are the way we are, and -- believe me --
even harder to explain it to others. Crazy
may be too strong a word, too broad and
vague to pin down the problem. Some people
who question me say that the U.S. is
“paranoid,” “backward,” “behind the times,”
“vain,” “greedy,” “self-absorbed,” or simply
“dumb.” Others, more charitably, imply that
Americans are merely “ill-informed,”
“misguided,” “misled,” or “asleep,” and
could still recover sanity. But wherever I
travel, the questions follow, suggesting
that the United States, if not exactly
crazy, is decidedly a danger to itself and
others. It’s past time to wake up, America,
and look around. There’s another world out
here, an old and friendly one across the
ocean, and it’s full of good ideas, tried
and true.
Ann Jones, a
TomDispatch regular, is the
author of Kabul in Winter: Life Without
Peace in Afghanistan, among other books,
and most recently
They Were Soldiers: How the Wounded Return
From America’s Wars -- The Untold Story,
a Dispatch Books project.
Follow TomDispatch
on Twitter and join us on
Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch
Book, Rebecca Solnit's
Men Explain Things to Me, and Tom
Engelhardt's latest book,
Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret
Wars, and a Global Security State in a
Single-Superpower World.
Copyright 2015 Ann Jones