From a European perspective, Americans are typically considered lazy, fat, and socially unaware. In France, any college student will unequivocally tell you that American foreign policy alienates all other countries. After Hurricane Katrina, the family I was staying with in France during my FSP last semester immediately criticized the American government for its racially fueled indifference to the hurricane victims. Europeans are quick to point out that Americans are so egocentric that they cannot accommodate foreigners.
However, in light of Europe’s ongoing social struggle with internal racism and xenophobia, these criticisms ring hollow. European racism, seemingly a different species of animal, is just as intense as American racism. Though statistics on race and racism may be comparable between Europe and the United States, the differences are evident in a conversation with any Frenchman about black North Africans. It is not necessarily the existence of racism that is the problem. Rather, it is the acknowledgment of the impossibility of accepting or assimilating foreigners that is a permanent fixture in the social landscape. The main difference lies in social attitudes toward immigration and multiculturalism.

European countries have been struggling with the issue of immigration versus national identity for centuries. The more an immigrant culture is different from the native culture, the stronger the perceived divide and the fiercer the assimilation effort. Contrary to the American concept of a nation of immigrants, in Europe, assimilation means the destruction of all that makes immigrants different.
Ferocious assimilation is particularly evident in race-torn Holland where a recent all-party report to the Dutch parliament concluded that 30 years of multicultural policy has failed in the Netherlands and that more energetic efforts should be made to oblige immigrants to learn Dutch and embrace local values. Even the leader of the leftist Dutch Greens has called for the outlawing of Muslim practice of importing spouses for arranged marriages.
Likewise, the French government, citing secularism, has passed a law forbidding Muslim schoolgirls from wearing headscarves in public schools. The government’s policy is that no forms of religious expression should occur within schools. However, Muslim girls in France will often note that their Christian counterparts can wear crosses, while they cannot even get away with wearing a headband. The French, especially older women, think the headscarf should be eliminated everywhere because it is a symbol of female oppression. This perception indicates a complete lack of understanding about what the veil might mean for a woman in terms of chastity and modesty. The real reason that the headscarf is found objectionable, it seems, is that it serves as a constant reminder to those around them that these women have chosen not to reject their background. The law, then, is clearly not an attempt to ensure a secular schools but rather a means to force Muslims to embrace French culture.
Such forced attempts at integration are not likely to encourage a change of attitudes. It is impossible to cultivate love or pride for a native culture through force. Rather, these laws are more apt to imply a direct disrespect for foreign cultural values that will lead to discontent, further feelings of alienation, and an even stronger tendency for immigrants to cling to those cultural values they feel they are ‘under attack’. For example, in France, in response to the law, many Muslim girls have dropped out of high school to remain in the privacy of their homes, separating them even more from the social sphere.
The lack of effort to comprehend foreign cultures leads to misconceptions about foreign religions, customs, and ethos that further fuel animosity and hatred. This result is evident in former Dutch leader Pim Fortuyn's views on Islam. It is, he said, a “backward religion”, intolerant of homosexuals and women's rights, clearly in conflict with the values of Dutch society. Fortuyn is completely wrong. Perhaps Islam speaks out against homosexuals and certain factions oppress women, but those views are also held by a number of people who are not Muslim. The Catholic Church also speaks out against homosexuality, but Catholics do not seem to be ostracized as a result. There is nothing unique in Islam that makes integration into Western society impossible, as demonstrated by the successful assimilation of thousands in America. Judging from the popularity of his views, it is clear that an anti-immigrant, anti-Islam stance is widely supported. The diametric opposition established in this message between foreign values and Dutch values implies that the two can never co-exist.
The difficulties faced by immigrant communities in Europe don’t differ that much from those in America. High rates of unemployment, low education rates, and poor language skills all lead to feelings of alienation within society. However, the social and political attitudes in Europe towards immigrants only enhance these difficulties. The reluctance of many states to grant citizenship to their immigrants and their European-born children contrasts sharply with America’s policy on citizenship. In France, the notorious “double-peine” law allows the expulsion of immigrant children, born in France, to their ‘native’ countries after a jail sentence. Such a law indicates an idealized notion of ‘French identity’ that cannot comprehend the possibility of ‘immigrants’ actually being French.

These laws indicate a completely different conception of immigrant cultures in America and Europe. For a Frenchman, being French means embracing only French values.
In America, embracing American culture does not require the rejection of one’s specific cultural background. Rather, it is possible to live embracing two cultures simultaneously. As long as Europe refuses to change its attitudes and acknowledge this possibility, European culture will be one of racism and hypocrisy..