Why does America hate liberals and socialism?
I honestly cannot understand it. Why is America, on the whole, so blind that the concept of being “liberal” in America is equivalent to what most other developed nations consider “conservative”? Why is Socialism so excessively maligned in America that Obama nearly lost the election for the phrase “spread the wealth”?
You keep hearing “Free Market” this and “Free Market” that from American media, and from the politicians. Even the most left-wing members of congress and senators espouse Free Market ideals – sure, they say that some regulation is necessary, but it’s only ever the bare minimum necessary. Why? And why is it that America is the only developed nation that had a backlash that led to “Happy Holidays” becoming almost the symbol of hatred, when it’s actually the best choice for tolerance?
Why is the country best-known for “separation of church and state” being in their constitution also the country most rife with religion being imposed on its citizens (at least amongst the developed countries)? Why is my own nation of Australia more tolerant of other religions, without having such a constitutional requirement?
Why am I writing about this now? Because I just watched a video that was somewhat eye-opening. I’ll link it here for you to watch (after the jump).
It’s a video showing what Michael Moore was going to include in his documentary, Sicko, but chose not to because nobody in America would actually believe it. First, it shows how America responded to the documentary itself, then it moved on to the cut portion of the “doco” (as we often refer to documentaries in Australia).
So, what was this content that America just wouldn’t believe? It was a video showing Norway’s quality of life, their prison system, etc. Norway is #1 on the list of countries as far as quality of life, etc, are concerned. They have the lowest murder rate in the world, the highest literacy, the best health standards, the second-highest female representation in government, the list of things to be envious of go on and on.
And in the doco, a “Conservative MP” is interviewed. In the interview, the guy comments on the fact that what is called “conservative” in Norway is what America would call “liberal”. There is no Death Penalty in Norway… indeed, the longest possible prison term is 21 years – that’s right, just 21 years. No Life sentences, no Death sentences, just punishment and rehabilitation.
So you’d think that, since America kills its worst criminals, and locks most of the other bad ones up for life, that the ones let free would be less likely to reoffend, relative to the worst in Norway that were released after less than 21 years, right? Wrong – Norway’s likelihood of reoffending (known as recidivism) is significantly less than that of America. Given this, you would think that their prison system would be extreme, right? I mean, if people are coming out of prison less likely to commit, they must have a much stricter prisons, right? Wrong again – the video shows a norwegian prison, which look much like a place that one might go for a school camp. The prisoners continue to work like a normal person, they live relatively normal lives, and there aren’t any fences or other such restrictions on their movements, either… and when they get out, they never want to go back.
So what is it about Norwegian culture that makes Norwegians so much less likely to commit crimes, and why is a prison system that looks almost like a camp so effective at reducing crime further? Well, it can’t be their immigration policy – 10% of Norwegian citizens are either first- or second-generation immigrants (meaning, either born in another country or the children of parents born in another country). This is somewhat comparable to (although most likely significantly less than) America’s numbers, with 10% of Americans being first-generation immigrants.
Could it be that they have a much more liberal culture? That when people are given more leeway in personal things, they’re less likely to do bad things? That recognising gay civil unions, for instance, might actually result in fewer drug users, or fewer people cheating the tax system? That when people are happier, they’re less likely to commit violent acts, or to otherwise try to harm other people?
Norway has gay civil unions – they were the first country in the world to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. This, despite the fact that not only do they not currently have separation of church and state, but they actually have a state church, of which about 82% of citizens are members. And yet, their religious tolerance is great, and active participation in religion is actually quite low – apparently, as few as 3% of Norwegians go to church every Sunday.
And Norway is far more socialist than America. Obviously, they aren’t actually socialists, in the sense that Russia and China are socialists (they aren’t communist, by the way), but there’s far less capitalism than in America. And this is despite Norway being one of the per capita richest countries in the world. Could this also be contributing to this difference? Well, let’s look at something more…
Norway is far more of a welfare state than America. So you’d think that, with their generosity to the unemployed, there’d be rampant unemployment, right? Wrong once more – 2.4% was their unemployment rate in 2008, when America’s unemployment rate was 4.6%.
Is there any doubt about it? Improve overall quality of life, and crime drops. Imagine if America implemented such an approach to government – you could very easily have a great country. Australia, too, should be implementing this – I am under no illusion that Australia is anywhere near this quality.
So what’s standing in the way? Well, it’s probably the ultra-conservative, ultra-capitalist way that America conducts itself, and its general fear of *real* liberalism and *real* social welfare. Why improve everyone’s quality of life when there’s rhetoric at stake?
And you know, I really should come up with something to end my posts, as sort of a “tag” if you will. Rob Galbreath uses “Save Completed”, for instance. So, here’s one I’ll start trialling…
We can change the world, if only we try.
14th 2009f January, 2009 at 8:59 am
I know you won’t like this, but I have to say you are quite an ignorant.
You compare US to Norway ?
Do you know that Norway has tremendous amount of oil (know what kind of oil European buy ? it’s Brent oil from the North sea)
You said Norway has lower reoffend rate and crime rate because of their leniency for criminals. Plainly idiotic. Look at the Arab country in the Gulf where they have very strict law. There you go, the crime rate over there is better than Norway so by your logic severe punishment is better. What a paradox hohoh.
And now to the reason why people in the US hate socialism.
You want to hear ? right, because they hate hedonism.
Especially after all the hippies movement.
I don’t know if you ever live in the US, learn that in the US. There is a large portion of the society (mostly young people) who don’t want to work hard, yet still demand good life. There only purpose in life is consume and ‘enjoy’.
What happens to them? During their young age, they went to college/school and live an party alcoholic life. Later in life, as they wasted their precious youth time, they don’t get good job, good life. They suffer, and therefore they turn to socialism and welfare hoping to live the rest of their in just a same hedonist way..
That’s what disgusting about people who are socialists.
14th 2009f January, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Ah, well done – you’ve completely failed at comprehension.
I never claimed that leniency was the reason for the lower crime and reoffend rates in Norway – I said that their leniency shows that harsh treatment doesn’t help the situation. Their leniency is merely another facet of the root cause for the difference – Norway maintain a much higher quality of life, and that is why they have a lower crime rate, a lower recidivism rate, and better treatment of criminals.
Meanwhile, you claim that “the Arab country in the Gulf” (which country, by the way? There’s a number of them, including Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Oman) has a lower crime rate… oh really? Do you have a source for this claim, or are you just making an assumption? And remember, you need to also show that their laws are more strict, and that quality of life is worse rather than better.
In addition, socialism has *nothing* to do with hedonism. So if hatred of hedonism is why Americans hate socialism, then American ignorance is even worse than I though. And of course, then there’s the great irony that you bring up America having a large portion of society being hedonistic – so which is it, do Americans hate hedonism, or not?
I refer back to Norway’s unemployment rate – it’s better than the unemployment rate in the US, despite a more “socialist” type structure than that seen in the US. So apparently, America’s disgust of socialism is based entirely on ignorance.
So remind me, who here is the ignorant one?
16th 2009f May, 2009 at 12:27 pm
You have a few interesting points, however you do not consider many variables. The first being Norway’s significantly lower population. With a lower population there will naturally be less crime.
Also, on principle, I believe that criminals should have to suffer harshly when committing major offenses.
16th 2009f May, 2009 at 12:59 pm
With a lower population there will be proportionally less crime. Norway has less crime relative to population.
As for the principle, why do you want criminals to suffer harshly? Since I know you, I know you’re a christian, so… whose job is it to punish people – us, or god? I believe the bible says somewhere that vengeance is god’s and god’s alone. Of course, from my own perspective as an atheist, the argument is this: the aim is to stop crime, not to punish criminals. If we can end all crime, the world will be a better place… but punishing criminals doesn’t necessarily achieve this end. You do what is necessary to minimise crime, by whatever means is most effective. And Norway seems to demonstrate that harsh punishment isn’t necessary, if the nation’s quality of life is high.
16th 2009f May, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Aielyn, would you mind telling me how less punishment is equal to less crime?
You show this in your post, yet you don’t explain WHY it is the case.
Would someone not be more afraid to commit a crime if there was a harsher punishment?
16th 2009f May, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Apersonyoudontknownamedalex – I didn’t say that less punishment is equal to less crime. Indeed, I never even said anything implying it. What I said was that there isn’t a notable correlation between crime rate and punishment level, that harsher punishments in a free and fair nation don’t actually reduce crime.
Why do you think it is that America, the only western nation with the death penalty, also has a much higher rate for all the crimes for which you apply the death penalty? If harsh punishment is so effective, shouldn’t those crimes at least be discouraged enough to bring the rate down to levels comparable to those of other western nations?
The fact of the matter is, criminals generally aren’t thinking about the possible punishment when they commit their crimes. To reduce crime rates, it is necessary to eliminate the reasons for crime.
That’s why Norway doesn’t bother with harsh punishment at all. I think that, for Norway, jail isn’t about punishment, but about removing people from main society and reforming them. And that’s how it should be, really.