WE ARE EUROPE - Values at Work

 

R.M. Westerink; August 2026 

We Judge the World All the Time

Our values [Appendix] and rights become a way of reading the world. We see an opposition politician imprisoned, a woman compelled by the state to dress according to religious rules, political expression censored or a prisoner executed, and often react immediately: they should not be allowed to do that. But not every society that differs from Europe is wrong. One of our own values is freedom to be different.

Different, Wrong, Threat

We understand:

DIFFERENT 🠊 another society chooses a different balance of values.
WRONG 🠊  power intrudes upon rights we believe belong to the person.
THREAT 🠊 an external actor can reach into our society and weaken our rights, choices or protections.

The tables below are therefore not scorecards of good and bad countries. They are mirrors.
GREEN marks broad alignment;
RED marks a clear rights conflict; yellow marks a mixed or different balance.
The point is to see where European reactions come from.

Mirror America - A Close Relative with Different Balances

European value / right	Alignment	Rights conflict / tension	Quick example
Dignity / personal freedom	GREEN - strong liberty tradition	— different balances	Gun rights vs public safety
Equal say / law	GREEN - competitive democracy and constitutional equality	— gaps and disputes in practice	Civil-rights and electoral disputes
Protection from arbitrary power	GREEN - courts, due process, checks	—	Judicial review
Help when needed	— more individual responsibility	— different social floor	Healthcare/social provision
Free to be different	GREEN - strong speech/religion rights	— broader speech protection	First Amendment tradition
Honesty / trust	GREEN - shared democratic need	— shared strain	Polarised information environment
Rules / compromise	GREEN - elections, courts, legislatures	—	Constitutional contest
Peaceful resolution	GREEN domestically	RED - death penalty remains	Executions in some states [1]

America mostly reveals family resemblance.
The strongest differences are often about balance - individual liberty versus collective protection, or individual responsibility versus social provision - rather than rejection of the protected person.

Mirror Russia - Where Rights Conflict Can Become Threat

European value / right	Alignment	Rights conflict / tension	Quick example
Dignity / personal freedom	— official traditional-values emphasis	RED - expression and identity restricted	LGBT restrictions [2]
Equal say	— centralised rule	RED - political competition constrained	2024 election; opponents excluded [3]
Equal before law / arbitrary power	— weak independent checks	RED - selective prosecution and limited restraint	Extremism laws; term-limit reset
Help when needed	GREEN - substantial social provision	—	Not a central confrontation
Free to be different	— enforced national conformity	RED - dissent/identity restricted	Foreign-agent and LGBT measures [2]
Honesty / trust	— state-directed information	RED - propaganda and media restrictions	Independent media restrictions
Rules / compromise	— controlled contestation	RED - peaceful dissent suppressed	Protest/opposition restrictions
Peaceful resolution	— force as state instrument	RED - coercion overrides self-determination	Crimea 2014; Ukraine 2022

Rights violations inside Russia are something Europeans may judge wrong.
Military force, cyber operations, sabotage or covert influence aimed at European societies add the second step: outside power can begin to weaken our own choices. Here wrong can become threat.

Mirror China -
When Order and Individual Autonomy Collide

European value / right	Alignment	Rights conflict / tension	Quick example
Dignity / personal freedom	GREEN in much private/economic life	RED - political expression constrained	Censorship/activist restrictions [4]
Equal say	— one-party national system	RED - no competitive national elections	CCP political monopoly
Equal law / arbitrary power	— formal protections; high-capacity state	RED - security cases lack independent safeguards	Detention/surveillance concerns [4]
Help when needed	GREEN - strong developmental/public role	—	Major poverty reduction
Free to be different	— diversity within political limits	RED - sensitive dissent/religion restricted	Controls on activists/minorities [4]
Honesty / trust	— state-managed information	RED - independent verification restricted	Internet censorship [4]
Rules / compromise	— managed consultation	RED - open political contest narrow	Organised opposition restricted
Peaceful resolution	GREEN - diplomacy formally emphasised	— coercive options retained	Taiwan/economic coercion concerns

China shows why rights conflict and threat must remain separate concepts.
Europeans may judge restrictions on participation, expression or privacy wrong without treating every feature of the Chinese system as a threat.
Threat begins where economic leverage, technology, political pressure or coercive power can alter what Europeans themselves are free to decide.

Selected Muslim-Authoritarian Cases -
When Community Rules Override Choice

European value / right	Alignment	Rights conflict / tension	Quick example
Dignity / personal freedom	— religious rules may shape private life	RED when choice is compelled	Iran mandatory-hijab enforcement [5]
Equal say / law	— systems vary widely	RED where unelected authority or unequal status overrides citizens	Iranian institutions; sex/religion distinctions
Protection from arbitrary power	— varies	RED in authoritarian systems	Detention/fair-trial concerns [6]
Help when needed	GREEN - strong charity/social duties	—	Zakat/community welfare
Free to be different	— community obligations can be strong	RED when belief cannot be changed/rejected	Apostasy/blasphemy restrictions
Honesty / trust	GREEN - truthfulness strongly valued	— authoritarian information control is separate	Religion itself is not the variable
Rules / compromise	— varies widely	RED where dissent is criminalised	Iran protest/expression restrictions [6]
Peaceful resolution	GREEN - no inherent religious conflict	RED when coercion enforces belief	Coercive enforcement, not faith itself

This is deliberately not a table for an 'Islamic world'. Muslim-majority societies differ enormously. The relevant confrontation is narrower: where religious or community authority is enforced against individual choice. Europe itself once enforced religious conformity; our sensitivity partly grew from that history.

What the Mirrors Reveal

Across very different comparisons, one boundary keeps reappearing. We accept a great deal of difference. What we repeatedly judge wrong is intrusion upon the protected person: somebody cannot choose, speak, vote meaningfully, believe or stop believing, receive equal legal treatment, or oppose power peacefully.

Our values tell us what matters.
Rights mark the boundary.
Threat begins when outside power can cross that boundary to us.

Honesty and trust deserve special attention.
Democratic societies permit argument, exaggeration and unpopular opinion. But systematic deception intended to make citizens unable to distinguish trustworthy information from manipulation attacks the conditions under which democratic choice and compromise work. Trust is therefore part of the protective infrastructure of several other values.

Values can guide us and rights can give us claims, but neither guarantees protection against political power, coercion or manipulation. At some point Europeans built institutions capable of carrying part of that task. That is where Europe itself begins to become a protective agent.

References

[1] Council of Europe / European Union positions on abolition of the death penalty; capital punishment remains legal in a number of U.S. states.

[2] Human Rights Watch and other rights-monitoring reporting on Russian LGBT restrictions, foreign-agent measures and political repression.

[3] Reporting on Russia's March 2024 presidential election; official result about 87.3%, amid heavily constrained competition.

[4] UN human-rights mechanisms and other authoritative reporting on censorship, surveillance, detention and political-expression restrictions in China.

[5] UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, reporting on mandatory-hijab enforcement and women's rights.

[6] UN human-rights mechanisms reporting on detention, fair-trial concerns, expression and peaceful assembly in Iran.

APPENDIX:

This is the observed*) EUROPEAN CITIZENS Values Package:

• We value human dignity - every person remains a person of worth.
• We value being free to live our own lives.
• We value having an equal say in how we are governed.
• We value being equal before the law.
• We value being protected against arbitrary power.
• We value helping each other when help is needed.
• We value being free to be different.
• We value honesty and sufficient trust to deal with one another.
• We value solving our differences through rules, dialogue and compromise.
• We require our differences and conflicts to be resolved peacefully.

https://europe-is-us.blogspot.com/2026/08/we-are-europe-our-european-values.html