What I find very paradoxical is that US Americans are a lot kinder and more compassionate than the Quebecois on an individual level but a lot less compassionate and kind on the collective level.
The same people in the US who will shower you with kindness, understanding and acceptance in individual dealings are against universal healthare, free higher education, and a strong welfare state.
And in Quebec, people who are a lot less accepting of foreigners and are much more severe and abrupt in interpersonal dealings than US Americans are all passionately in favor of a very strong welfare state.
Within the US, there is a similar trend. People in the Midwest and the South vote for conservative politics but as individuals there are a lot more open and kind than people on the East Coast.
My sister in Quebec speaks perfect French and has been living there for over 15 years. Still, she doesn’t feel accepted by the Quebecois and doesn’t even have a single Francophone friend even though she makes her living by her brilliant interpersonal skills. I, however, feel totally accepted and I’d say even cherished by the Midwesterners who often find it hard to understand my not-so-strong accent.
I have no explanation for this phenomenon.
Clarissa's Blog 
My structuralist viewpoint would be that societies can manage only so much interest in others and kindness at one level will be offset by indifference at another.
In other words, in Quebec and most other societies that believe in strong welfare policies people don’t have to think about other people in the flesh because the government is supposed to do that. In Middle America people are nice to each other so why should they pay government to do that?
It’s also possible that a society doesn’t display much kindness at either level (former CCCP and its descendents come to mind)
LikeLike
“It’s also possible that a society doesn’t display much kindness at either level (former CCCP and its descendents come to mind)”
– I was just going to write a post about this but you said it first. 🙂 Yes, you are right, my people are mean both individually and collectively.
LikeLike
I once heard somebody telling this story:
In Sweden (? -I am not sure about the country’s name) there has been extremely homogenous population with specific cultural norms (i.e., work ethic), which made very developed welfare state feasible since people were ashamed not to work. Now, however, a big number of immigrants from 3rd world countries arrived, who have different cultural norms and feel 100% fine living on safety net’s payments (or charity). So, the original people of the country will have to make some legal changes.
The person, who told this, has a PhD, btw. I don’t think he was consciously lying, even if retelling the story through his own worldview. Just remembered this after reading your post.
I think smiles are superficial to a great extent, they don’t cost anything real. Why not be nice to somebody, who won’t cost you anything ever, sinking or swimming by himself? But if you want “a strong welfare state,” you want the population to share some cultural norms and it may contribute to suspicion of strangers. What if they came to take advantage of your strong welfare state (your taxes)?
I am sure some other historical-cultural factors are at work here, but I don’t know anything about the areas, so could only think of the most general reason.
LikeLike
“In Sweden (? -I am not sure about the country’s name) there has been extremely homogenous population with specific cultural norms (i.e., work ethic), which made very developed welfare state feasible since people were ashamed not to work. Now, however, a big number of immigrants from 3rd world countries arrived, who have different cultural norms and feel 100% fine living on safety net’s payments (or charity).”
– In Quebec it’s kind of the other way round. Immigrants are going to bust their asses working because, for them, having enough to live on is not the number 1 priority. Becoming a useful, integrated member of society is their central goal, so they can’t go the welfare way. I’m talking about all immigrants except Russian speakers, of course. My people don’t try to assimilate because they know they won’t manage to do it anyways, so they chase every bit of welfare they can.
“I think smiles are superficial to a great extent, they don’t cost anything real. Why not be nice to somebody, who won’t cost you anything ever, sinking or swimming by himself?”
– No, I’m not speaking about the superficial stuff. People really go out of their way to help in any way they can. For instance, do you remember my stories about the bus drivers? Bus drivers in Quebec are paid a lot more but they will drive over you before they do anything to be helpful.
” But if you want “a strong welfare state,” you want the population to share some cultural norms and it may contribute to suspicion of strangers. What if they came to take advantage of your strong welfare state (your taxes)?”
– There is no open immigration to the US, so the issue is moot.
LikeLike
From 3 posts ago:
“So when I imagine any of the Liberal / progressive folks I know coming up to me and telling me that “government is more nobly motivated” and “government is us, the personification of the nation”, I’d think my friend was running a high fever and would offer hot tea / medicine / chicken soup / to accompany the sufferer to the doctor. People just don’t think in these terms (or express themselves in this embarrassingly cloying language).”
This post:
“What I find very paradoxical is that US Americans are a lot kinder and more compassionate than the Quebecois on an individual level but a lot less compassionate and kind on the collective level. ”
You are doing here exactly what you said liberals don’t do 3 posts ago. You are thinking the government is the personification of the people.
The government is not the people. The welfare state has nothing do do with compassion and everything to do with control.
The Quebecois aren’t compassionate; they simply want more government control.
The conservative Americans are compassionate and want less government control.
LikeLike
I heard the people on American TV yelling “Let him die if he doesn’t have health insurance”, so please, spare me the weepy stories about governmental control. The same conservative Americans who want the government to police their beds and their bodies also seem to have very little objection to governmental control.
LikeLike
“The Quebecois aren’t compassionate; they simply want more government control.”
Yes, they want the State to be their mother in a patriarchal setting.
“The conservative Americans are compassionate and want less government control.”
False, they want the State to be their father in a patriarchal setting.
LikeLike
““The Quebecois aren’t compassionate; they simply want more government control.”
Yes, they want the State to be their mother in a patriarchal setting.
“The conservative Americans are compassionate and want less government control.”
False, they want the State to be their father in a patriarchal setting.”
– THIS IS BRILLIANT. THE BEST THING I READ ALL WEEK. Did you come up with it yourself?
LikeLike
Not totally, a radio host has called the “gouvernement du Québec” as a “gouvernemaman” or “governmother” in English.
LikeLike
Some people want their government to act out their charitable impulses; some people want their government to act out their mean impulses.
Some people place more emphasis on their social mask. Really, Southerners will bless your heart all the time, and they don’t call it Minnesota nice for nothing.
And that mask only seems to come into effect depending on what kind of stranger they perceive you to be. Let me put it to you this way: since I moved down South, I do not ever let my cell phone die. I always have a car charger in my car and an extra charger to take to work. That goes double for my brother.
High context vs low context cultures
LikeLike
Australia is a high context culture, not a low context one. This is reflected even in the street signs, which are far from systematic, implying you have to know where you are going or you are an outsider.
LikeLike
Also I would say that the low context, independent style was the one I was brought up with, except in the case of understanding jokes, which were high context. Really, I think it may be impossible to categorise nationalities in this way. You could say that there is a certain degree of rationality that makes for independent thinking, rather than relying on the collective mind, but a lot of stuff will still be context dependent. I think gender relations are very much like this, because there are certain behavioral lines you can’t cross before people start to penalize you for that.
LikeLike
I don’t know, people from the FSU countries are mean in any context. 🙂
LikeLike
I am sure.
LikeLike
Very interesting post. There’s so much to say about that.
LikeLike
Ah, the paradox of the Quebecois. You gotta love Quebec. 🙂
LikeLike
I had the same experience. If you see what their state does you think that the Swedish must be the nicest people on the planet. But when I lived there, I experienced them as very distant and unlikely to offer help even to colleagues who are in obvious need, or greet you on the street although they know you. The Dutch state is extremely tolerant. But the Dutch are actually not very tolerant people individually and will always watch each other for mistakes and cling to their racist “Zwarte Piet” tradition. The nicest, most tolerant and generous people I know are the Italians, but their state is almost sociopathic, pretty intolerant and they elect the meanest and greediest politicians. It is very weird.
LikeLike
As a Canadian, I found your comments interesting. I found Quebec very disturbing, Montreal was cosmopolitan, usually friendly. Any effort at my speaking French, no matter how poor, was smiled with a responding effort to make me at home. Outside of that area was very, very different, I was definitely viewed as les maudit Anglais…and sadly, I rather doubt that things can change easily.
LikeLike