I strongly disagree. There is nobody in Eastern Europe (or Western Europe if they know enough about politics) who is boggled by money in politics or misleading ads.

There are countries in Europe that have had Gulags in the last 50 years, I doubt they are boggled by the idea of a for-profit prison system.

As a European who has lived in America and now in SEA, this "as a European" is used by people who generally don't understand the variety of different life experience of people in Europe.

I wonder if you're not going a git hard on the "strongly disagree". The main issue I think is that "as a European" tends to excludes eastern Europe in its generalization. As such, I agree that it isn't very correct. It would probably make more sense if it was "as a citizen of the more politically homogeneous Western Europe, in particular Portugal, Spain, France, Ireland, UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Italy, Iceland, Austria... and to some extend also but not so much for all topics and cases the other countries in Europe"... but that is a bit too terse.

I think it also tries to convey how different "a very large number of countries and millions of people" views X. It will always be a generalization.

So, if you consider "as a European" to be "Western Europe", it very often applies, overall. It is a generalization, after all. And, as far as generalizations go, I honestly think "as a European", or... maybe better "as a Western European", if you will, to be very useful way to express a very complex connection, and difference in opinion or... zeitgeist. For example, it helps illuminate the dichotomy in the reaction to private philanthropy in the US that should have never been necessary. For Americans, it is accepted that it is a heart warming act, while (for a European), it more often comes across as dystopian.

As a final note, I'm wondering if you might not want to see that argument I'm presenting. Because you point out how my case with ads and money in politics isn't that uncommon in western Europe. Let's be clear, I'm not saying it doesn't happen, or that Europe is problem free or perfect, or anything like that, but the problem and perception of it, is worlds apart. Attack ads come across as a joke that have no place in political discourse, yet, it is everywhere in the US.

But then again, maybe you are right. It is after all pretending to include the "shared voice" of people who do might very well not share that voice. It can be disingenuous. I wonder if making it more specific will still open up for smaller subsets that disagree. If you say "as a Norwegian", you are still implying agreement from others that will very much disagree.

Maybe more nuanced would be EU citizen, instead of European. At least the EU has some sort of political agenda and a somewhat coherent view on international relations. A continent on the other hand does not have an agenda. It is a landmass.

I don't think it gets hugely better when you look at the EU. I mean, maybe it becomes possible to say some things as an EU citizen, but the differences between governance and politics in Sweden and Bulgaria are significant. Private prisons are certainly available in the (current and recent) EU. (Literal, not merely "ad") corruption is barely hidden in the east, and certainly present in the west. Indeed, an American could easily react with a measure of shock about how little Europeans care about how important a free press is to sustained democracy.

The EU does stuff, but it is far more interested in a being a trade block than a protector of liberal democracy.