I wrote this en route to Ankara, the capitol of Turkey, where we arrived just a bit ago. It’s fascinating to be there, for a number of reasons: Turkey is arguably the least “European” of the states in or being considered for the EU (considered, in the case of Turkey, who has been in talks w/ the EU since 2005). It is a secular Islamic state that has wielded tremendous power over the centuries, and that if it were to enter the EU, would be arguably the largest state by population in the EU (rivaled only by Germany). It is also a highly challenging and controversial subject in the EU, being the home country of many of the EU’s current and past immigrants, a topic that is being hotly debated currently.

Below I shall write about a few topics on which I’ve been thinking. Be forewarned; this is a random collection of musings, in no particular order. 

The opportunity

This opportunity is amazing. When else does one get the chance to step outside one’s daily life, connect with the broader global community, and connect with highly-placed leaders in multiple other societies, all with the sole goal of building a better transatlantic relationship? In Copenhagen, we met with Members of Parliament, heads of government ministries, leaders of companies and NGOs, and we got to hear their challenges, concerns, and hopes. Fascinating. For those who don’t know, I’m doing this trip under the auspices of the Marshall Memorial Fund, which manages all logistics, connects us to the various meetings, and supports the trip. It has been amazing so far, and everyone I’ve met who is associated with the program has been phenomenal, giving much of themselves to improve this transatlantic relationship and ensure an interesting and fruitful trip for our group.

Taxes

Denmark has among the highest tax rates in the world; if I understand it right, they pay approximately 56% of their income in taxes. They also have an incredible social state; all citizens (and immigrants) are entitled to free education (including advanced degrees), health care, etc. The citizens pay the taxes willingly, both on a sort of trust system (“I know my neighbor will pay this, so I, too, am so obliged”) and because they rather like the benefits of the system. In Copenhagen, we met with various people from across the political spectrum (a spectrum which, we were told, lies to the left of most of Obama’s policies), and while there was some disagreement over the level at which they should be taxed, even conservatives with whom we met felt they should still be heavily taxed. This reality sparked a discussion amongst our group in which some felt the taxes too onerous. I was intrigued not so much by the tax rate, but by its results: the Danes, from what I could tell, have an extremely high standard of living, are well cared-for and have tremendous opportunity. If that is the result of their system, it seems rather appealing! That said: I can’t imagine how we could implement something of this nature in the US. Core to the Danish system is that trust in each other, something inherited from being a relatively closed, homogenous society. They know all about each other (in the case of the government, this is particularly true; citizens are tracked in all ways from birth via their CPR number, without which they are unable to go to school, get health care, open a bank account, or any number of other things), and as such, have great faith that all will play by the rules. Further, they seem to have a shared sense of obligation to care for one another, acknowledging that some are better off than others and that those should help care for those less well-off.

Immigration

Immigration is a significant challenge in the EU, and Denmark is no exception. As noted above, the Danish system is partially built on a strong social and cultural bond with broadly-understood expectations and obligations. New immigrants, no matter how they try, do not immediately understand these social bonds, and understandably can have a hard time at first (not least due to a challenging language). Further, as was explained to us, many immigrants arrive and learn of the welfare state and, understandably, think a place in which they can not work yet still be provided for seems like a great thing. Finally, many immigrants, as in other countries, seek to maintain their cultures, including their languages and styles of dress. In a country as homogenous as Denmark, that is understandably a challenge, both in terms of developing cross-cultural understanding and ultimately in allowing different cultures not only to co-exist but also to grow together. It is interesting to compare this with the US style of integration, which I would argue tends to allow for other languages and certainly styles of dress and eating to persist while simultaneously integrating immigrants into the mainstream. The US struggles, perhaps, with effective immigration of massive numbers of first generation immigrants, but by the second generation, most immigrants have adapted to the US, learned English, and become part of the system.

Transportation

One of the things I loved most about Copenhagen was that it is incredibly bike-oriented, with one estimate I heard being that nearly 60% of citizens bike to work in Copenhagen. There are bike lanes segregated from car lanes and sidewalks, giving cyclists a safe and fast transit. While plenty of people drive, in a few conversations people told me it was “simply faster” to ride bicycles. Myriad bicycles served a wide range of needs, from box-oriented bicycles for carrying people or luggage, bicycles with flat hauling beds, and of course, kids’ seats galore. People rode in high heels, skirts and dresses, suits, and all other conceivable outfits, with chain and wheel guards assuring they didn’t get greasy. Riding around the city, cars seemed very aware of our presence, again contributing to an overall safety. The genius of this easy system: one can drive, but if one wishes to avoid doing so, one has other options. This, to my mind, is the core of a great livable city: a wide variety of transportation options enabling true mobility.

Money

Dang, Copenhagen’s expensive. Think $6 for a doppio espresso (Seattle price ~$2).

Renewable Energy and Climate Change

Europeans I’ve met believe in both. Seriously. And they see them as a huge opportunity for economic growth and innovation. So do the Chinese, if the news reports I’ve been reading are to be believed. I love that some US companies agree, and remain disappointed that the US resists acknowledgement of the greater opportunity climate change presents. Preaching to a choir, I imagine, I’ll assert that never in human history has something been as thoroughly studied as climate change, and there is no doubt that anthropogenic climate change is occurring. Further, even if that weren’t true, the rest of the world generally believes it is. Given that, how can a country so generally pioneering and innovative as the US not rise to the opportunity to lead in developing new products and services and financial mechanisms to reduce greenhouse gases?? Have we lost our edge? Scary thought.

Finally, Biodiversity

A recent report on biodiversity asserted that the economic threat of decreasing biodiversity could rival that of climate change. Of course, they’re linked. Of course, if one is concerned with such things (you know, survival), one now must begin thinking about how to make a case to a global population to whom the very idea of biodiversity is likely a new one that they should care. Oh – and about that climate change thing…

Now, to see a bit of Ankara!