[product50]

You are talking as if somehow non-Americans have access to more liberties across non-government entities in their lives. If anything, Americans treasure and enjoy the most freedoms across the widest gamut of institutions vs. non Americans.

[spaetzleesser]

I don't think that's true. Coming from Germany I feel that in the average US citizen living as an employee has less rights and freedoms than the average German citizen. In principle you can live a very free lifestyle in the US but you either have to have lots of money or check out from the lifestyle most people live.

[entropea]

That's true. If you want freedoms and rights in America, you're either not a part of the 'normal' American way of working and likely not making much money, or you're wealthy. Workplaces are authoritarian and remove a lot of rights when you walk in the door or sign into your computer, even doing surveillance on work devices that are further than simply asset tracking & data protection.

[Barrin92]

Home owner associations or your average American Beauty style dystopia is much rarer outside the US because people haven't voluntarily locked themselves into suburbia.

In Europe the middle class generally moves into cities and not out of them where you're for the most part left to your own devices rather than being bullied around by activist neighbours or your church parish or what have you. I mean just take a look at fiction, from Steven King's small town horror, to the Truman Show, or PK Dick, this sort of provincial clampdown on people is quite uniquely American. Between boyscouts and girlscouts and the cheerleading team there's not that much freedom left.

I noticed this most in my encounters with American college students abroad. They're like oversized children. It's quite striking how managed American life is. From school until the evening to clubs and on-campus living, into the nuclear family and then retirement in Florida.

[TedDoesntTalk]

> from Steven King's small town horror, to the Truman Show, or PK Dick

And then there is The Addams Family. The 2019 film addresses their conflict with American suburbia quite well. In the end, the neighborhood accepts them. Sometimes art does not imitate life.

[adrianN]

Germans for example have an expectation of privacy at the workplace. It's not allowed to monitor a German employee's web browsing on a work computer. In the US the employer can monitor them all they want.

[zdragnar]

Property rights are more "first class" than privacy rights; in the US, the idea that a company is not allowed to monitor the use of company equipment by employees is absurd- to the extent that many institutions are regulated to require it (i.e. monitoring for data exfiltration, etc).

Of course, most companies' monitoring is pretty shallow and reasonable, but there are exceptions, and I certainly wouldn't choose to work for one of the exceptions.

[spaetzleesser]

That makes sense. Property ownership seems to be one of the most important values in the US. Which leads to property owners having the freedom to restrict the freedoms of other people. You can see that in companies where employees are assumed to basically have no rights while working. Same in the west here where property owners fence off large areas of land and nobody can pass through. In Germany there usually is some kind of path where people can pass through. This can make hiking in CA quite difficult because you often run into a fence.

[zdragnar]

Though there are historical reasons for allowing land owners to restrict unauthorized access, realize too that property extends to anything that can be owned, not just land.

If a company has a commercial kitchen, it seems reasonable to be to prohibit employees from running their own food delivery startup out of the kitchen... If you get access to a company car (I.e. travelling salesman), the company should reasonably expect to be able to take action against you if you use ot to go drag racing, or for a personal vacation.

Likewise, the notion that an employee should expect to have free reign over a company computer and company internet access is just strange to me.

[dependenttypes]

That does not seem very enforceable. Surely their internal DNS server and routers keep logs for example.

[groby_b]

The use and access of those logs is strictly regulated, and yes, it is enforced.

Given that Germany has a much healthier employee representation than the US, it's much more difficult for management to slide in surveillance under the radar. (It's also rather painful if they get caught)

[TedDoesntTalk]

I wonder if those German workplace freedoms stem from a different legal system of culpability.

In some US states, for example, an employee who commits a crime using his employer’s computer has opened up his employer to civil liability. If the employer can show that the employee actively sidestepped the employer’s controls, the employer can make a good case against liability.

I wonder if anything like that can happen in Germany. If not, then employee privacy on employer-owned devices makes sense.

[pintxo]

Usually, the locale employee organization ("Betriebsrat") will negotiate a contract with the employer ("Betriebsvereinbarung") where the usage of company equipment for private use is regulated. Haven't read one in years, but would assume, that this case is handled there, and gives the employer the right to check logs etc in case of criminal/legal inquiries.

[spaetzleesser]

“In some US states, for example, an employee who commits a crime using his employer’s computer has opened up his employer to civil liability. “

I always find this reasoning strange and inconsistent . Companies give company cars to employees which could injure people. Or I could stab somebody with an employer provided knife.

[pintxo]

It's likely an effect of data privacy being established as one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the German constitution and further strengthened by specific laws like the German data privacy law, which is a lot older than GDPR.

Interestingly data privacy (more precisely the "Recht auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung") is not named explicitly in the constitution, but has been "created" by the German constitutional court in 1983 in the context of a law suite against the German census of 1983 [1].

Historically I would argue all of this is the result of the experience 1933-1945 and also the (what was known at that time) experience in East Germany, the communist German Democratic Republic.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informational_self-determinati...

[pintxo]

It's enforced to the point where the access control system to the building, even if it tracks entry and exit timestamps, cannot be used for e.g. time keeping or to monitor employee attendance. German companies will have to have a separate time keeping system, even if the access control system uses the exact same (RFID) cards for identification.

[pradn]

People in other countries are sometimes less burdened by interference from non-governmental organizations. Countries with strong unions offer workers freedom from the worst of workplace strictures - think the right to assemble or to speak out against your employer or blow a whistle without being fired. Most countries don't have HOAs and far fewer rules around how you can build and maintain your own house. You can paint your house bright pink in most places in India and no one will stop you.

The American body politic's focus on rights as the defining feature of the social contract isn't shared everywhere else. For example, in many countries, the focus is on the material benefits the government can provide for you ("development"). And because of that, there's less reflexive distrust in government as an institution able to benefit your life, in principle. Parts of the American citizenry absolve themselves of the expectation that government can, even in principle, improve your life.

America is living in the long 18th century - Enlightenment liberalism worked out over three centuries.