Hacker News Reader

Comment by mradek | Hacker News Reader

Yeah but then you need something that people seem to get upset over.

Culture.

And that doesn’t mean getting stoned or acting weird or being narcissistic af, but having some basic moral and virtuous behavior.

You see old people come out and start cleaning the stairs after a rain. I saw it first hand and thought wow this would never happen in the US. You see people get in line and let the people onboard the train out before going in. Not gonna happen in the US. You can drink alcohol outside but in the US people would just be drunks everywhere and trash the place. And they trash the place without drinking.

So no.

You can’t replicate that sort of dynamic without people acting a certain way. Basic decency would be a good start.

View on HN

Equally a fault of the people as it is the urban environment which shapes them…

> You can drink alcohol outside but in the US people would just be drunks everywhere and trash the place. And they trash the place without drinking.

Maybe if 95%+ of Americans weren’t indoctrinated since WWII with the concept of “a single family home and white picket fence” as the American Dream (and anything else is to be thought of as less than), Americans would grow up with a sense of and respect for shared space and environment. Instead we usually look at anything that is not our home/backyard/frontyard as “not ours” and thus “not important”. We see this in the lack of flagship public plazas/squares that you can usually find in even small European/South American/Asian towns, but also the continued shrinking of funding for libraries, neighborhood parks, etc.

If there’s no public realm in the first place, it’s no wonder most who grow up have no concept or respect for it. It’s a vicious cycle, and one many Americans (regardless of political affiliation) will insist is the “only” way, and actively fight anything else, since it’s all many know.

I think you're describing the Midwest. People clear sidewalks and driveways for each other after a snow, unasked and uncompensated. People let each other off public transportation before crowding on. And... there are drunks everywhere. So two out of three.

But what I'm aiming at is this: in less urbanized areas of the United States, the sort of shared ideas that allow successful coexistence exist. It's largely the major cities where you cannot find it.

My experience in America (even up here in the "mean" northeast) is that we do tend to treat our families and neighbors very decently, which suggests that we're not exactly devoid of compassion.

However, I believe this is different than what the parent poster is talking about.

The parent poster refers not to a generalized lack of compassion from Americans, but a peculiar lack of respect for shared, public spaces.

I think it's an interesting distinction.

It's like we have a very focused version of communalism. Most of us instinctively want to help those in our "clans" - friends, neighbors, family. But we see much less value in places and institutions that are shared by the wider public: libraries, streets, town squares, etc.

this diffusion of responsibility for shared spaces or public spaces is one of the peculiar things the USA will share with the PRC.

> It's largely the major cities where you cannot find it.

I would argue differently, and say that it's entirely a factor of density. The more people that are crammed into a small area, the more you will see the spectrum of human behavior in any given situation.

So, in the midwest you might see people clearing sidewalks and driveways for each other - I'm more familiar with the HOA that sends threatening letters to people for not shoveling fast enough. But you don't see both those things at the same time, so you can choose to focus on whichever you prefer.

In my experience in a large US city, people are incredibly kind and very much look out for each other, even strangers. I have many times seen strangers helping each other in situations, both minor and serious, and neighbors even more so. And sure, yes, I've seen people acting badly, but in general from living in both part of the country, people in the city are far and away nicer and more concerned about the welfare of those around them.

> I would argue differently, and say that it's entirely a factor of density. The more people that are crammed into a small area, the more you will see the spectrum of human behavior in any given situation.

Then why are New York and Chicago so much worse in this regard than Tokyo? They’re all big, dense, highly populated cities.

As someone above said - culture. As to why the culture is different between say, NYC and Tokyo, well there’s many factors involved.

But as some people say when describing certain things in NYC, “it’s why we can’t have nice things”.

>NYC and Tokyo, well there’s many factors involved.

And the most obvious one is demographic composition.

Probably the most taboo thing to say too.

I myself prefer the diversity of NYC over the monoculture of most East Asian cities (and I say this as an East Asian myself), but failing to recognize that both models have pros and cons because of political correctness is stupid.

Manhattan sucks but NYC has great neighborhoods

Doesn't describe any part of the Midwest I'm familiar with...

It is possible that we're both right. Do you mind sharing where in the Midwest you have experience?

Ohio. People there are vile, especially in Akron and the smaller factory towns.

And Oklahoma, outside of Tulsa.

My anecdote to counter yours:

I moved from the PNW to Rhode Island for four years, and then to Ohio. Moving to the Northeast was absolutely a culture shock for both of us, with “colder” and less helpful people in general. Over time, we discovered that the people in rural areas were still friendly, and the city people would open up after they got to know you, but there was a very noticeable lack of trust or respect in Providence. As an example, I remember one of those electric scooter companies pulled out of Providence because they couldn’t stop our citizens from throwing the scooters into the Bay.

We moved to Cincinnati next and it’s a night and day difference. Friendly service at businesses, people helping each other in snowstorms, etc. I’ve helped to care for my elderly neighbors since day one and we always get help when we need it as well.

Sounds like you are white Protestant. Cincinnati folk are really friendly to people who look just like them. For the rest of us, not so much. I got tired of them telling me to go back where I came from, so I did.

I lived in Akron for several years, and though I wouldn't say people were vile — that's pretty strong — I would say it's one of the places in the Midwest where I observed the least concern for one another. It ranked low on the "do people put away their shopping carts" scale. Of course, I couldn't really afford to live in the better parts of town. (I don't mean to say everyone was a self-absorbed jerk, though; I had some really good neighbors.)

No experience with Oklahoma.

People don't like to hear it, but a high-trust society is enabled by homogeneity.

Look at Japan's demographics, and opposition to foreign religions, languages, etc. They don't allow "the world" to recreate itself inside them, and the conflict and distrust (Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam) that that brings.

This is probably a just-so story. Australia is, by the numbers, a high-trust country, and is more diverse than Canada. Both are higher-trust than Japan. Contrary to your claim here, Japan and the US have in fact very similar surveyed levels of trust. What seems actually to be the case is that remarkably high-trust countries, surveyed at, I don't know, several SD above the mean, are rare. Several of them happen to be Nordic, and people extrapolate from there.

I'm sure being ethnically homogenous does smooth things over for Norway. But so does being small and galactically wealthy from extractive industry.

Singapore is a high-trust society without the homogeneity.

Yes though increase in diversity brings higher demand for authority because it seems to be the only thing that can bring order. Some would call Singapore "authoritarian" (how compatible is it with "Democracy" of the West? Or post-Imperial Japan for that matter -- the main topic here). They invest energy into micromanaging it.[1]

There was a lot of racial tension[2] in Singapore before Lee Kuan Yew straightened them out. Mandates on what languages to use for what ethnicities, with English being the main language, seems to have worked. As well as a racial quota system to prevent natural self-sorting into ethnic groups, and to enforce integration.

"To prevent conflicts and ethnic isolation (Singapore is the safest city in the world according to Gallup) ethnic quotas are mandatory.The distribution of public housing is carried out based on these quotas and it is impossible to find a block of apartments in which the percentage of Chinese, Indians and Malay people gives preference to one of the groups (with regard to the country’s population). And since the construction and ownership of the property are strictly regulated, given the lack of space on the island, it is extremely hard to escape the system. These quotas are also applied within the administration itself, in businesses and even in some activities such as leisure.To date, the system has been a success that has almost prevented any sign of segregation. However, the model depends on a system of surveillance, punishment and repression, which feels somewhat Orwellian, but without which, its implementation would not be feasible. This is, paradoxically, a society that voluntarily relinquishes certain freedoms related to the way in which citizens interact with one another, in order to guarantee their coexistence."[3]

[1]https://www.asianews.it/news-en/Ethnic-and-religious-violenc...

[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_race_riots_in_Singapore

[3]https://tomorrow.city/a/forced-integration-plan-singapore

Does the high trust stem from interpersonal solidarity or draconian persecution of misbehaviour?

Difficult to say probably the latter considering the previous cases of racial tensions in Singapore but if you want a non-authoritarian example I think Canada is a good one.

> draconian persecution of misbehaviour

Like banning chewing gum. And the death penalty for bringing in drugs?

At the business and public administration sphere it’s a carefully crafted (and top-down) Anglo-Chinese culture.

Homogeneity is necessary but not sufficient. Italy is pretty homogenous (95% Italians) but it’s not a particularly high trust society.

Correct

I hope you don't mean racial homogeneity, because that would be a load of _equine excrement_

If you didn't, homogeneity really isn't the best word to convey the idea that social trust comes from long-standing, slow moving cultural traditions.

Even then there are counter examples but it could be one of those 'necessary but not sufficient' situations

Like it or not, racial tensions fuel a lot of conflict inside nations. America itself has had a lot of racial tension based conflict in its short lifespan than many other countries much older than it. I'm not condoning it of course, just explaining it.

>I hope you don't mean racial homogeneity, because that would be a load of _equine excrement_

I'd argue that Mumbai/India or Lagos/Nigeria are overwhelmingly racially homogeneous. So there must be some additional factor beyond racial homogeneity.

Only if you see "races" as the American-style social construct and not as people in India and Africa see it, which is at a tribal level. I had an hour-long discussion with a Ugandan once that explained to me the major tribes in Uganda, and he says that anyone can tell the tribes apart just by look and dialect. A European looks at Lagos and sees "Nigerians", a Nigerian looks at Lagos and sees Yoruba, Igbo, etc. The Indians also have a brutal caste system and thousands of sub-dialects originating from provincial clan systems and would never call any of their major cities "homogeneous".

Europeans also had a lot more tribal-based racism in the past; southern vs. northern Italians, Scottish vs. Welsh, even sub-clans inside both of those nations, etc.

I agree

Of course, everything starts with the people. They can have beautiful things on the open since no one's gonna trash it.

I miss how Japanese civilians try not to get in the way of others. When I'm just simply walking past slow people, they apologize thinking they had been blocking my way. Never happens where I live where people have a misplaced sense of entitlement. Where I live, people don't even give a single thought about their car's loud music system and motorcycle mufflers.

Social programs that take care of the poor are part of that. Affordable housing is part of that.

Decency is for people who have things to lose. If you're already a "dreg" why would you behave well?

There are countries that are a lot poorer that have higher trust than many wealthy countries though.

I honestly think it comes down to education and distillation of values. Can America honestly say that it teaches its children to be considerate of others, respect public places, and other such things? Certain groups of people adopt these attitudes by cultural osmosis but it isn't institutionalised nor supported as an ideal by the larger community. In Japan it is. Even homeless people in Japan keep their spaces tidy etc it is crazy to see.

Edit: and I'm not trying to target the US here, I don't think these values are explicitly taught in most western countries. Think of things like school kids are expected to clean the school up before they can go home. That teaches people to behave a certain way from a very young age in regards to communal spaces.

Japan doesn’t have particularly generous social programs, and has plenty of poor people.

This is achievable with cultural education and values being taught from families and schools. It's not that much effort, but it may look unfeasible in the beginning.

Culture starts at home and in the family. No thanks to state sponsored cultural re-education.

If half the families are broken, what do we do?

This doesn’t reflect my observations in the US.

I see old people tending to their house all the time. Even sweeping the sidewalk and other public spaces.

And some states allow public drinking and it’s not a bunch of drunks everywhere.

I’m starting to wonder where you lived in the US.

Most US cities are like this. Not the burbs or the rural areas which in my experience is all about me me me.

Most burbs or the rural areas are like this. Not the cities which in my experience is all about me me me.

this trash culture you speak of is mostly in the big cities. there are still good parts of the US.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com