Home Thoughts From Abroad, Part VII: Random Thoughts

After about ten days in Denmark, I start to feel Danish again.

Maybe that sounds a bit cryptic, since I am Danish... but after 30 years in the US, I feel more American than Danish, when I am there. After some time in Denmark, I start feeling more Danish than American. I believe that-- unless you've actually lived back-and-forth between two countries for much of your life-- it's hard for people to conceptualize that a person could move their "center" of values so easily.

My perspective on "what I like most here, and what I like most there" is, of course, uniquely mine. As such, my random musings are mine alone, and not meant as an editorial about "what people feel," in general.

Just saying.

One of things I continue to like about Denmark is that it moves slower, is less aggressive and feels a lot less "type A" than the US. I also like what feels like a sort of "cultural philosophical resignation" to the fact that people and things we get involved in might well be "less-than-convenient" and imperfect. To me, that feels like a sort of "applied realism," rather than apathy.

These cultural differences manifest in many different ways. Back in 1996, I started selling things on eBay... and interacting with large numbers of buyers both in the US, as well as in Denmark, Sweden and Norway. The US buyers (gross generalization, of course!) would have an email in my box 5 minutes after the sale going "I paid! Did you send the item yet? When can I expect it? Did you send it YESTERDAY (before I even bought it)? Did you send it EXPRESS at your expense, so I will get it sooner?" The Danish buyers (gross generalization) might email me three weeks after the sale and go "Ummm.... did I pay you for that, yet?"

Convenience and speed are not central parts of Danish society and culture. I'll be the first to admit that this can be frustrating, if you are trying to get a piece of paper from the government office that's only open from 11:00am to 3:00pm on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Often, the sense of Danish egalitarianism is to blame (gonna pick on the Danes, for a moment!), centered around the notion that nobody has the "right" to inconvenience anyone else. The argument might be (gross generalization!) that we "don't have the right to make the people in that office be inconvenienced by working late and missing dinner."

Another thing I really like about Denmark is the extent to which its culture has embraced gender equality. To a large degree, Denmark adopted (culturally, if not "officially") a system of "soft values" back in the 1960's and 70's... as a result of which Danish women probably enjoy more equality than women almost anywhere else. But it's not a "harsh" equality, filled with anger and a sense of "entitlement;" Danish women are definitely women, not "pseudo-men."

This arrangement also affects men, in the sense that male relationships are more "cooperative" and less "competitive/territorial" in Denmark, than in the US. I also like that with equality comes the attendant responsibility for equality. It's not "equality" in the sense of lifting bags of cement, as it is equality in the arena of "being a strong person;" far less emphasis is placed on specific acts/roles emerging as a product of gender first.

In the early days, this did lead to certain absurdities. Newspaper advertisements to fill jobs were (at one time) required to state that anyone could apply for the position... leading to headlines such as "Wet nurse sought, male/female."

No system is perfect, of course. And, for that matter, it's hard to say that any one system is "better" than another... I live in the US by choice; nobody held a gun to my head. I visit Denmark by choice, because I like spending time here. In some ways, going back and forth between the two reminds me not only of the strengths of each place, but of the things we really "need to work on." When I sit back and consider the areas needing improvement, I increasingly become aware that in the US we have problems with the negative aspects of a "me/I" society, while in Denmark there are problems with the negative aspects of a "we/us" society.

More, though, what I learn from observing these cultural differences (and there are many, not covered here) is a better sense of who I am, and why I feel inclined to respond in certain ways that seem almost "countercultural" in the US. I was born in Denmark and lived here (on and off) till I was 20... so many of my key early impressions (and "socialization") were based on Danish-- not US-- values and practices.

Crime: Different nations, different values?

I never quite know how I end up down some of the rabbit holes I find.

Somehow I ended up considering violence and crime, following some article somewhere that led to some statistics somewhere else. It made me ponder something about my early life... and remember part of my childhood. Specifically, I didn't remember us ever being worried about violence or guns in Denmark, but we were plenty worried about theft; the house being burgled or the car being broken into. Since I've lived in the US I realize that I worry less about being stolen from, than I worry about someone violently attacking me, or shooting me.

Of course, these are just "feelings," but it made me curious.

So I ended up looking at this 1400-page UN report on crime in different countries. And came away with some reassurance that these were not "just feelings."

Indeed, there are five times more homicides (per 100,000 people) in the US, than in Denmark. If you break out homicides with a firearm, twelve times more. Then I looked at a different form of violent crime: Rape. There are about 3.5 times more rapes (per 100,000 people) in the US, than in Denmark.

But this is only half the equation. Here's the flip side. In Denmark, there are about twice the number of thefts (per 100,000 people) compared to the US. That balance also holds true for "property crimes," in general.

Now, before anyone starts to "go off" on me about gun laws or socialism or whatever... I don't care, and that's not what this exploration is about. Second, I also know that you can use statistics to tell almost any story you want. And that not all crimes are reported.

Anyway, realizing that my gut feelings had some kind of anchor in reality, I started to consider "WHY?" Why these differences?

It occurred to me that perhaps crime is a strange mirror and reflection of what a society ultimately "values."

Denmark is a very "community" oriented society. Concepts such as "us" and "society" and "common good" rank much higher than "me" and "mine" and "the individual" as core values. On the other hand, "things" and "objects" and "wealth" are part of common life, but not that important. I remember certain "messages" I heard... violence against someone was almost an unspeakable act; something only the crudest barbarian would resort to. If someone broke in your house, however, the response was less likely to be outrage than "Yeah, well, you should have had better locks, shouldn't you?"

In the US, we're spread out, and "individualism" is king, and the sense of "us" and "community" is not nearly as strong. One the other hand, there is a strong drive to "acquire" and to gain wealth, often in the form of "objects" (property). I have a vivid memory of my downstairs neighbor during my senior year in college in Texas having his car stereo stolen... and him saying to be (and he was dead serious) "If I'd caught that guy stealing my stereo, I'd have taken my gun and shot him right there!"

So I wondered this: Do we-- as a species-- avoid perpetrating crime against what we value most? Let's assume for a moment that we all have the same inner degree of "criminal intent." Danes value "people" highly, but "property" not so highly... in the US, we value "property" (relatively speaking) higher than "people."

Is there a subtle, subconscious "trigger" mechanism... that if we are driven to commit crime, we are more likely to do so against what our surrounding culture values less?

Of course, I realize there are a myriad variables-- this is NOT a "scientific" inquiry! It is merely a "pause for thought" exercise.

Cultural Commentary: Growing up in the Shadow of the Jante Law

I am a Danish national.

I was born in Denmark, and I lived there (on and off) till I came to the US in late 1980, to go to college. Whereas my formative years were spent in many different locales in different countries, my family background is very definitely Danish, and it seems that my strongest social and cultural influences are Danish-- especially if we take the assertions that we "learn" most of our core values before age 14 seriously.

My first experiences with the US (notwithstanding previous short visits to New York, Boston and Virginia) were in the great state of Texas. To say that Denmark and Texas are cultural polar opposites would be an understatement... that's simply a fact, not a judgment. I have since lived in other parts of the US-- Arizona, Oregon, and now Washington-- and have a greater appreciation for the regional variation in core values within the US. That said, I do think all nations have "socio-cultural identities," and if you were raised with those identities they will likely shape some part of your value system and choices for the rest of your life.

I have never thought of myself as "particularly Danish." At the same time, even though I have lived in the US for almost 30 years, I don't think of myself as "particularly American." I guess I think of myself more as a "citizen of the world," than anything. As such, I feel neither particularly insulted or hurt when a US citizen points out to me (for whatever reason) that I seem "very foreign" or "very UN-American." Similarly, I also want to make clear that I don't regard such feedback as "negative" comments, merely "factual" ones.

However, whenever such a comment does come up, I am always curious. To some degree, I am curious about "what" seemed foreign... but mostly I'm curious to track whatever "it" was back to its cultural roots.

Yesterday and today I have been taking somewhat "light days," as I am trying not to completely give into some flu/virus that has been poking at my body for the past 5-6 days. Mostly I've managed to keep it at bay... however, the downtime has given me a little time to contemplate. This afternoon, I was thinking about the movie "Avatar" and how my sense of "rightness" about the Universe was bolstered and given hope by the subplot ("nature defeats machinery" rather than "man conquers nature") of the movie. This made me drill deeper into my general feelings of "disregard" for people who believe they are "something" because they have money, power, equipment or whatever.

Then I thought about the places, over the years, where I'd been "called on" my foreign-ness, while trying to fit into US culture. A series of words/concepts started to line up (non-competitive, non-combative, egalitarian, soft, invisible, unmotivated, unassuming, self-effacing, passive, cold, dispassionate) and suddenly a penny dropped.

The sound of said coin hitting the floor made me go do a little research on an old piece of Danish (and Scandinavian) socio-cultural heritage; something I never really considered to be much more than a piece of "cultural mythology:" The Jante Law.

I won't go into great details about what it is. It has its basis in a 1930s literary work that somehow became deeply infused into the subtext of the Scandinavian value system. The odd thing about it is that even though its influence is often dismissed and disregarded by cultural anthropologists and the populace at large, it nonetheless casts a very long "shadow" across the Danish social and cultural landscape. As Danes, we may not like it, and we may laugh at it, and ridicule it, and we may claim it doesn't affect us... but in very subtle ways, it has a significant impact on the way we form our values and how we "present ourselves" in the world.

The core principle of the "law" goes something like this: "Don't think you're anyone special or that you're better than us."

In the original book, the "law" was laid out as a sort of "Ten Commandments" by which people were supposed to live. HOW it got from being "a book" to being a central part (however subtle) of several national identities, I do not know. I'm sure I could research and find out, but I don't have the inclination. The truth, however, is that it did become infused in the culture-- to such a degree that cultural anthropologists around the world study and write about its effects, even while they disagree that it has much influence. Few guides to Denmark (and Scandinavia) fail to mention the Jante Law somewhere. It's NOT "imaginary," in other words.

Here's a rough translation of the ten "commandments:"

• Don't think you are somebody
• Don’t believe that you are as good as us
• Don't believe that you are smarter than us
• Don't believe that you are better than us
• Don't believe that you know more than us
• Don't believe that you are more than us
• Don't believe that you are good at anything
• Don't laugh at us
• Don't think that anybody cares for you
• Don't believe that you can teach us anything

From where I sit today, it sounds pretty dismal. I can also see why the cultural impact of such a thought pattern would lead to the sort of "brain drain" (a substantial exodus of independent thinkers and innovators to pastures greener and more welcoming) the Scandinavian countries experienced in the 1970's and early 80's.

Oh!
Wait...
I left that part of the world during that period.
Things that make you go "hmmmm...."

In the interest of brevity, I'll only paraphrase and summarize a few salient comments from cultural anthropologist Åke Daun's writings on the topic:

"There is a strong tendency among Nordic people to strive for socio-cultural homogeneity. Another typical Nordic feature contributes to this tendency: the wish for conflict free encounters in the private life.

Scandinavians are particularly prone to achieve consensus in attitudes and opinions, and generally avoid socializing with others than like-minded people. Confrontations are regarded as particularly unpleasant. Nordic people generally do not believe themselves to be interesting enough to awaken the curiousness of others, and to compensate for this there must be food and beverages, and maybe certain activities, when meeting others.

Another feature worth noting is a "cultural shyness;" people feel inhibited around others they don't know well, and tend to be very (overly) observant of their own behavior since it is regarded as very important to control what kind of impression others are left with.

There tends to be very strict borders between private life and work life, which manifests as a general resistance to small talk about private matters with strangers (a characteristic which has periodically been reported to be a great hindrance to forming in business contacts in foreign countries).

The lack of passion a stranger might perceive in Nordic people is likely a reflection of both a genuine trait and the fact that rational reasoning has a strong precedent (preference) over for emotional reasoning. Not to be misunderstood, emotions are NOT at all disapproved of in most contexts, but they are regarded as "pure" emotions of no further value than to signal one's general sentiment with life or fate.

Quietness is regarded as the commonly accepted norm, and "noisy fellows" are strongly disapproved of. Vociferous stubbornness is deemed as very ill-mannered, as is interrupting and talking over the voices of others.

The Nordic ideal is to think twice before one speaks, and to utter only one's most firm beliefs, and then only when there is a considered and deliberate intention. The assumption is that what one says is going to be remembered for ages, and if one says something stupid or "wrong" it will be proof of one's stupidness and general incompetence... and can be used against one in encounters for ages afterward...

To be kind and good-natured is important. It is generally seen as preferable to be quiet or agreeable rather than uttering a strongly opposing opinion, unless one really aims at hurting."

Well.

I have been sitting here for some time, contemplating this... and what it means.

Like the truth of most situations, there are two sides to this coin. In some ways, I feel a little more enlightened about myself, from a cultural history perspective. I'm still glad to be Danish, and I'm still glad I live in the US, not Denmark. Although I didn't start writing this because I was looking for an outlet to "pass the buck" to as explanation for being who I am-- I was just curious-- I find myself looking at me through slightly different eyes.

Ultimately, life is about balance. I look at the above and realize that American culture could "learn a thing or two" from Danes, and Danish culture could "learn a thing or two" from Americans. Both approaches to living have their merits. Neither is perfect.

So, I think I will leave this little anecdote and cultural history lesson with an old memory that just popped into my head.

I was five years old, and my Godfather (a powerful insurance executive from New York) was visiting us in Denmark. "Uncle Victor" spent quite a lot of time with me and was (as family lore would have it) "quite worried" about my seeming timidity. And he tried (although I don't remember it ALL that well) to teach me how to "Stand tall, look 'em in the eye, and tell 'em what you know!" Having been taught that the proper way to greet someone (per Danish culture) was "quick eye contact, followed by a slight bow of the head in deference and a handshake" made Uncle Victor's way seem strange to me. Or, as my mother once said I told her "He's nice, but quite rude."