Things Immigrants Couldn't Believe About the USA

nel e nel wrote:
cheeba wrote:

American patriotism is far more... intense? than European patriotism.

A Spaniard, a Catalan and a Basque walk into a bar... ;p

Oh god, I'm having flashbacks to relatives visiting.

garion333 wrote:

I liked this.

Here in this discussion, others have responded that they were surprised that Americans live so far from family. These interpersonal issues may be related: perhaps the depth of relationships aren’t as strong here, and bonds quickly forged are more easily broken. I don’t know.
I do remember a Nigerian friend expounding on this by asking me, “If I woke you up in the middle of the night and asked you to come with me, what would you say?”

“I’d ask what was going on…”

“You see,” he said. “My friends from my village would come with me, and on the way would ask, ‘Ade, where are we going?’”

It's interesting that so many people are treating this as a positive thing. If somebody wakes me up in the middle of the night and asks me to come with him, than I'm definitely going to ask him what's going on. And if it's something sh*tty, then I'm going to try and talk him out of it. The idea that loyalty to friends and family exceeds all other ethics or morality has gotten the human race into a lot of trouble in the past. I don't buy this idea that the intensity of a friendship is defined by what you would do for somebody. Sometimes it ends up being defined by what you won't tolerate from someone, while still remaining their friend.

In the example, they still ask but start moving with the assumption their friend needs them. The secondary implication is your friend would only be asking because they did need you.

Nothing in the example commits them to taking the next step after they hear an answer.

Rahmen wrote:

- India - crossing the street. There were rules but just very different from ours

I love how understatey this is.

Well, the thing is, those Nigerians are an extremely trustworthy people, so of course they would go along with whatever is said without question. Also, there are a lot of Nigerians who have totally legitimately invested money somewhere and need your help getting it, so if you get an e-mail from one of them asking you to help, don't you question it, you respond and pay whatever is necessary to get that money out of the bank!

Rahmen wrote:

In the example, they still ask but start moving with the assumption their friend needs them. The secondary implication is your friend would only be asking because they did need you.

Nothing in the example commits them to taking the next step after they hear an answer.

Then I'm not all that sure there's any difference between Nigeria and the US in that respect.

Chairman_Mao wrote:
Rahmen wrote:

- India - crossing the street. There were rules but just very different from ours

I love how understatey this is.

We were visiting a relative of my wife in Calcutta once. She was helping us get to an Internet cafe to send some work back to the states. With about five us in duckling fashion behind her, she surveyed the four lanes of traffic ahead of the median and calmly stepped out into it after raising her hand.

It was astonishing.

Bloo Driver wrote:
Rahmen wrote:

- Japan - everything in a vending machine

Yeah.

.... yeah.

Talk about culture shock.

And it's fantastic. Nothing better than being thirsty and having a drink at my finger tips at all times. I live in the middle of nowhere and there's a huge number of vending machines here.

Couple things about Japan that surprised me:
-the reliance and quality of convenience stores. They are an essential part of the daily life when living in Japan.
-ATMs get holidays off and stop working after 8pm, in most cities/towns. It's a money robot. It doesn't get a vacation.

kazooka wrote:
garion333 wrote:

I liked this.

Here in this discussion, others have responded that they were surprised that Americans live so far from family. These interpersonal issues may be related: perhaps the depth of relationships aren’t as strong here, and bonds quickly forged are more easily broken. I don’t know.
I do remember a Nigerian friend expounding on this by asking me, “If I woke you up in the middle of the night and asked you to come with me, what would you say?”

“I’d ask what was going on…”

“You see,” he said. “My friends from my village would come with me, and on the way would ask, ‘Ade, where are we going?’”

It's interesting that so many people are treating this as a positive thing. If somebody wakes me up in the middle of the night and asks me to come with him, than I'm definitely going to ask him what's going on. And if it's something sh*tty, then I'm going to try and talk him out of it. The idea that loyalty to friends and family exceeds all other ethics or morality has gotten the human race into a lot of trouble in the past. I don't buy this idea that the intensity of a friendship is defined by what you would do for somebody. Sometimes it ends up being defined by what you won't tolerate from someone, while still remaining their friend.

I think that highlights the differences. Why would your friend be waking you up in the middle of the night to do something sh*tty? If it's something they would do shouldn't you reconsider your friendship?

I think it ties in to the different definitions of 'friend' that others have mentioned.

I have probably 3 true friends. If they, or my sisters or my wife, woke me up in the middle of the night to go somewhere I would have my pants and shoes on before they finish talking. I have a wider circle of people I'm friendly with, they probably would not get that response from me.

My interpretation of the phenomenon is that it's less a sense of loyalty and more a sense of unity. Loyalty suggests that you're subordinating your individuality to another person's authority. Unity is trusting that your friend always has your best interests at heart (as you do his), and that he wouldn't wake you up just to use you unless he has a life or death personal crisis; in which case you would have wanted him to wake you up and drag you along anyway - because you care. In most cases, the assumption is that your friend woke you up and got you going because he thought that it would be important to you, from what he understands of your values (not something he thinks you ought to do, but something he knows you would want to do).

It's extremely difficult to parse this in this frame of reference.

One thing that often gets me is that people will carry their ancestry as a point of cultural differentiation. You might be 3rd generation American but your great great grandmother was Irish so you're "Irish".

Maq wrote:

One thing that often gets me is that people will carry their ancestry as a point of cultural differentiation. You might be 3rd generation American but your great great grandmother was Irish so you're "Irish".

Is the trumpeting of your 4th or 5th generation ancestry like that just an American thing? I know it's not the same, but I understand that in England people will do that to you - someone who had family that came from (for example) Italy four generations back will be insistently called Italian.

We do the reverse. We trace our lineage until we find a point of commonality, and when we find one, we'll call you Filipino.

LarryC wrote:

My interpretation of the phenomenon is that it's less a sense of loyalty and more a sense of unity. Loyalty suggests that you're subordinating your individuality to another person's authority. Unity is trusting that your friend always has your best interests at heart (as you do his), and that he wouldn't wake you up just to use you unless he has a life or death personal crisis; in which case you would have wanted him to wake you up and drag you along anyway - because you care. In most cases, the assumption is that your friend woke you up and got you going because he thought that it would be important to you, from what he understands of your values (not something he thinks you ought to do, but something he knows you would want to do).

It's extremely difficult to parse this in this frame of reference.

Actually, that post was amazingly effective at clarifying the distinction for me. I really like the unity perspective.

LarryC wrote:

We do the reverse. We trace our lineage until we find a point of commonality, and when we find one, we'll call you Filipino.

Do aunts (via marriage) or stepmothers count?

Depends on how much of the culture you've imbibed.

LarryC wrote:

Depends on how much of the culture you've imbibed.

Does it count if it's only the food? (And some swear words.)

I think it also depends on how successful you are. I don't think Rob Schneider speaks fluent Tagalog, Ilonggo, or Bisaya, but apparently, he counts. I think there's a good chance you count already, Gravey.

LarryC wrote:

:D I think it also depends on how successful you are. I don't think Rob Schneider speaks fluent Tagalog, Ilonggo, or Bisaya, but apparently, he counts. I think there's a good chance you count already, Gravey.

You guys have cool names for your languages.

I thought there were no cats in America. Also that the streets were paved with cheese. Total letdown.

Maq wrote:

One thing that often gets me is that people will carry their ancestry as a point of cultural differentiation. You might be 3rd generation American but your great great grandmother was Irish so you're "Irish".

I think there's two reasons for that. First, American culture really isn't that old, so if people want to practice older traditions they usually turn to whatever culture their ancestors came from. Secondly, there are plenty of ethnicities that were severely oppressed when they first showed up in America, which is why members of those groups tend to think of themselves as being more than just "Americans."

As far as American families not being nearly as close knit as other countries, I think that's rather accurate. But it's also a double edged sword. One of my best friends is Vietnamese American, and for lack of a better term his mom is a raging pscycho who has made his life living hell. Now, like many Americans he's decided as an adult to not let his mom continue to hurt him. But it has also meant that his extended family has written him off as a bad son who doesn't respect his mother. His brother will no longer talk to him, because under Vietnamese tradition he should be deferring to his mother and showing her the utmost respect even when she is completely awful. I personally like in modern America that parents are expected to make some kind of effort with their adult children, versus getting an automatic pass.

jdzappa wrote:

I personally like in modern America that parents are expected to make some kind of effort with their adult children, versus getting an automatic pass.

Yes, this a billion times yes. f*ck traditional "parents are always right" BS.

clover wrote:

I thought there were no cats in America. Also that the streets were paved with cheese. Total letdown.

jdzappa wrote:

I think there's two reasons for that. First, American culture really isn't that old, so if people want to practice older traditions they usually turn to whatever culture their ancestors came from. Secondly, there are plenty of ethnicities that were severely oppressed when they first showed up in America, which is why members of those groups tend to think of themselves as being more than just "Americans."

There is no "American culture", and there never has been - even the earliest colonial corporations were very different in their approach to life in the New World. We are a country made up of 11 cultural nations. They identify culturally in large part by their origins, and because most of those are physically outside the country, they maintain their identity by reference to their origins. (The book that is reference is Colin Woodard's "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America". It's quite fascinating history, not dry at all.

What's amazing is how little they've assimilated over the centuries.

Robear wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

I think there's two reasons for that. First, American culture really isn't that old, so if people want to practice older traditions they usually turn to whatever culture their ancestors came from. Secondly, there are plenty of ethnicities that were severely oppressed when they first showed up in America, which is why members of those groups tend to think of themselves as being more than just "Americans."

There is no "American culture", and there never has been - even the earliest colonial corporations were very different in their approach to life in the New World. We are a country made up of 11 cultural nations. They identify culturally in large part by their origins, and because most of those are physically outside the country, they maintain their identity by reference to their origins. (The book that is reference is Colin Woodard's "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America". It's quite fascinating history, not dry at all.

What's amazing is how little they've assimilated over the centuries.

While there are definite differences between the various parts of North America, I think that list works better as sub-cultures than distinctly separate ones. I think that there definitely is an "American culture," but it's an amalgamation of those sub-cultures (with some given more representation than others).

TEAM LEFT COAST

Robear wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

I think there's two reasons for that. First, American culture really isn't that old, so if people want to practice older traditions they usually turn to whatever culture their ancestors came from. Secondly, there are plenty of ethnicities that were severely oppressed when they first showed up in America, which is why members of those groups tend to think of themselves as being more than just "Americans."

There is no "American culture", and there never has been - even the earliest colonial corporations were very different in their approach to life in the New World. We are a country made up of 11 cultural nations. They identify culturally in large part by their origins, and because most of those are physically outside the country, they maintain their identity by reference to their origins. (The book that is reference is Colin Woodard's "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America". It's quite fascinating history, not dry at all.

What's amazing is how little they've assimilated over the centuries.

Interesting article that IMHO is worth it's own thread discussion. That being said, I'd like to counter-argue that the majority of Americans still share certain traditions, beliefs and interests. The upcoming Thanksgiving holiday is a perfect example. I'd also argue that there are certain cultural icons and artistic/musical styles that are uniquely American.

Last argument - if we say that there is no "American" culture because of regional differences, isn't that true of practically every large or diverse country? I'd argue the regional differences in say Whales or Scotland or England are far greater than say Texas and New York, yet nobody would say that there isn't an overall UK culture.

I've never heard of a "UK culture". English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and then there are the class differences. But UK as a whole? I doubt it.

The point of the book seems to be that there is no one over-riding culture to which Americans acclimate and change. The regional differences *are* the point.

Stengah, could you name the elements of American culture that are common across every sub-culture? Heck, could you name *one*? What characteristic describes Americans, coast to coast?

BTW, the book is based on decades of polling and voting results as well as history, so it's functional differences, not academic or idealistic. It's very interesting and because it has predictive value (in elections, for instance, and for predicting which states will pass which kinds of laws) it seems to be pretty solid.

Robear wrote:

I've never heard of a "UK culture". English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and then there are the class differences. But UK as a whole? I doubt it.

The point of the book seems to be that there is no one over-riding culture to which Americans acclimate and change. The regional differences *are* the point.

Stengah, could you name the elements of American culture that are common across every sub-culture? Heck, could you name *one*? What characteristic describes Americans, coast to coast?

BTW, the book is based on decades of polling and voting results as well as history, so it's functional differences, not academic or idealistic. It's very interesting and because it has predictive value (in elections, for instance, and for predicting which states will pass which kinds of laws) it seems to be pretty solid.

I bet you've heard of European, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Caribbean cultures though, haven't you? Of course each one can be broken down into more specific sub-cultures on the basis of their differences, but to an outsider they'll seem more similar than different. Just because they can be broken down into those 11 groups doesn't mean that you can't talk about those groups as a whole anymore. There's also nothing stopping anyone from breaking one of those 11 groups down even further to talk about the cultural differences between rural Maine and New York City. The level of specificity Woodard's talking about is just a level more refined than the more general "American" group JD's talking about. You can also pull all they way back and talk about Western and Eastern cultures, despite each one containing very different sub-cultures. The similarities will be pretty surface level, but they still exist. All of the American subcultures are going to be rather individualistic, more comfortable with violence than sexuality, and somewhat generous/friendly/polite to strangers.

I wish I could find the guy but there was a professor that gave a talk on PBS one time about World War II. He argued that Americans were particularly and perhaps uniquely adept at replacing a fallen superior. He said the independent American spirit meant that if a sergeant (or whatever rank it was) fell in battle, another soldier would take his place almost seamlessly. I'm probably doing his argument an injustice with my description, but my google-fu is weak and I can't find the guy's book or position.

I definitely believe there's an American culture. Everything we have is adopted, of course, but we've made several things our own. Barbecue. Muscle cars. Halloween. Not to mention all that music.