I'm anxious to read the guide, but I think it boils down to American's making an effort:

- Effort to learn simple greetings/thank you's (bonjour madame, grazzie, gracias, etc.)

- An effort to try new things when abroad (ie: no McDonalds, Hard Rock, Starbucks, etc.)

- An effort to step off the beaten (ie: touristy) path in major cities.

- An effort to "go with the flow" when something is not like it is at home (small hotel rooms, slow service, disorganized lines, no credit cards, lack of napkins are all things I've heard Americans loudly complain about in Europe)

I know I'm preaching to the FT crowd, but maybe the World Citizens Guide can be a required read before a passport is issued or put in a seat pocket on Int'l flights?

WOH WOH WOH. Now I'm all for learning greetings and going with the flow, but you're talking about STARBUCKS here?

WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?

In response to OP, yes I do. I think the majority of frequent international travelers do.

I would say a qualified 'yes'.

The more I travel, the more I come to the opinion that people are fundamentally the same, and that the differences, while forming the interesting, fun part of travel, are largely superficial and habit-based. I see more diversity among my friends and neighbours than I do when travelling (admittedly, I live in South London), so when 'doing like the Romans', I always wonder what that means.

If it means learning a little language, learning the most important customs, and taking advantage of all the little things (esp food and drink) that make the place interesting, then absolutely. But if it means forcing yourself into acting in a way that fits with an ill-conceived stereotype of that country's people... Then absolutely not.

There can be a kind of inverse snobbery among certain groups of travellers with respect to 'seeing the real x' or 'acting like a local', 'doing what the locals do'. First off, the assumption that 'locals' all act the same and all prefer to eat in cheap, back-street restaurants is rather patronising. And the relentless quest for authenticity quite often leads to little but those trying to sell an archetype to the Lonely Planet crowd, looking authentic, but being actually as genuine as the Starbucks in the Hilton up the road.

I will act out of respect. I will take advantage of whatever I can. I went to Uzbekistan, I bowed with my hand on my heart, I drank tea cross-legged on a bedframe, I ate plov and shashlik. That's a great part of travellilng. Pretending to be something I'm not, or seeking out something that doesn't exist... No, I didn't do that.

One thing to note is that in other English-speaking countries the toilet is not called "the bathroom".

One thing that is nice about visiting Starbucks in other countries, is that you don't have to "rent" a table to get coffee (ie: coffee is served in "to go" cups).

However, the last time i was in Europe, I noticed that more of the local shops were bucking tradition and serving coffee in paper cups also. And it's hard for me to imagine why else would visit Starbucks (known to some as "Star-burnt" or "franchise for steamed milk") in places that serve much better coffee at local shops (unless of course you own shares of SBUX and feel somehow that you'd be helping their bottom line). For example, there is a Starbucks right accross from the Opera House in Vienna, and this seems a little sacriligous somehow, in a city/country that takes coffee so seriously.

PS - Starbucks founders learned the art of coffee roasting from Dutch immigrant Alfred Peet (founder of Peet's Coffee), so their methods of coffee-making/roasting actually are European in origin

Excellent post - i.e. I agree with you.

So basically (like in many other instances), everything in moderation.

What shocked me about the article I posted, was that it indicated that a large number of tourists were on one of the extremes. I've witnessed tourists myself while abroad that fit the mold as described in the article, I just didn't realize how prevalent it was (according to the article).

So, yes, I second the motion that the "World Citizens' Guide" should be required reading for all Americans travelling abroad.

There is also one in the heart of the Forbidden City in Beijing. It used to be outside the walls, but too many protests and a realization that 95% of the business came from the Western tourists who were buying tickets into the Forbidden City anyway led them to relocate it... here!

(hover your mouse on the pic and a little box will point out the Sbucks for ya)

I don't share your doubt.

Of countries in Europe that weren't in the Soviet sphere, most accept immigrants who don't speak the official language(s). And most such persons accepted as immigrants are neither rich nor holders of "celebrity status".

I do as I deem fit, for I'll never be a local in most place. "Doing as I deem fit", does include making adjustments, but generally won't amount to "doing in Rome as the Romans".

I�m not sure you should completely disregard these places when they�ve integrated themselves into the local culture. In Rome these days, the Romans frequent burger bars after all.

I enjoyed tofu burgers for the limited time they were available in Tokyo MuckyDs (ebi-prawn burgers are rather nice too - & you always get a free glass, and I mean glass of water with your meal). I don�t eat chicken but KFC in Japan has become a quintessentially Japanese experience (especially at Xmas) The portions they serve you are perfect, like the ones you see only in commercials.

I ONLY frequent Starbucks in Japan as they serve green tea frappuccino (not available in the UK - I don't like any of the other beverages they do).

And I�ve eaten battered squid rings at MacDonalds in Italy and the gazpacho in MacDs in Spain is very good (from Alvalle) as are the salads � some with olives and asparagus.

I�m not suggesting you only visit American franchises, but you can learn a lot about the culture your visiting by seeing the unfamiliar items available in these familiar surroundings.

There's something very Japanese about having the salmon/rice/miso combo breakfast set at Denny's too.

I agree that visiting "localized" versions of the places you're accustomed to in the US can be a lot of fun. Pizza Hut in China is my favorite example -- it is a luxury restaurant there where, in addition to some amazing pizzas that you never could have imagined being served in the US, they also serve incredible milk shakes, frozen coffee drinks and desserts. The cheesecake is incredible.

I'm afraid you are mistaken. I know of at least two countries (France and the Netherlands) that require would-be immigrants to speak the native "official" language prior to acceptance as citizens.

Additionally, given the history of European countries as being stricter regarding immigration, it would surprise me if 1) applications for citizenship would be accepted without someone knowing the language and
2) immigrants who met the often lenghty requirements for living in a country would not know the language

Also, I have heard that Switzerland will accept individuals not meeting all requirements, based on a their income level, but not sure if this is true or not. I wonder if anyone else might know?

Yes many do, but most of us can distinguish between the government and the people. Standing on the left on the tube will get a reaction though.
I really, really shouldn't find that funny.

I'm afraid your claim about me being mistaken is mistaken. Given your words below, it's clear I am subject to your apparenty moving of goal posts. [The specific talk was about accepting immigration, not about giving citizenship, as you go through below. ]

I'll play along with the game, despite the moving of goal-posts.

I know naturalized French citizens who did not speak French at the time of acquiring French citizenship. They are neither rich nor famous. If you want to move the goal posts again from "given the history of European countries" to the more recent present, this discussion won't be that.

The UK, France, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Spain, Portugal, and Italy all have citizens who were immigrants that acquired citizenship of those countries when they didn't speak the official languages at time of filing for and getting citizenship.

And the so-called history of European countries being stricter regarding immigration is questionable. For one, many take in a high proportion of refugees than most countries on the planet, including us; for two, there was immigration within and to European states even before there was immigration to the US.

Many European countries have a higher proportion of immigrants from a non-bordering area than most countries outside of the Americas.

Also, the US gives more people headaches to enter than European countries. Look at the number of people who need a visa in advance vs. who don't to visit in different places. For just one example, take a look at the ease with which Brazilians can go to certain countries yet not go to the US.

Are you now asking about citizenship or immigration? It's hard to answer questions when dealing with goal-post moving.