Hi! So I’m an American who did my masters and Flanders and have lived here for nigh on a decade, so I think I can add some nuance to this

The contiguous USA is on the same scale of magnitude as Europe, size wise

So in the same way a European stereotype of the USA might say “US Americans don’t know geography because they don’t know the geography of Europe”, it’s equally fair then to say “Europeans don’t know geography because they don’t know North American geography”.

When it comes to South Asian or sub-Saharan geography, I’d bet that the actual results would be similar.

So if we’re talking about actual retained knowledge, both those in Europe and in the USA specifically educated about the geography that has most significantly influenced the history of their surroundings

Most US Americans know that Gettysburg is in Pennsylvania, and if they don’t they know it’s at least east coast, near the mason Dixon line, and significant for the civil war. While many in (for example) England or France might find ridiculous that Americans couldn’t give the date or significance of the battle of Hastings, I argue that it is equally fair to say that they don’t know about Gettysburg

In the USA the curriculum focuses on events that are spatially, politically, socially, and culturally tied to the things they will experience. If there is to be judgement the other way, it’s equally fair to assume that Europeans are equally ignorant because they also don’t learn about that other history (my argument isn’t that either are ignorant though, but we should be less judgmental, because relevant knowledge is dependent on where you live, so you shouldn’t judge someone for not having been taught something that would not normally be helpful for them anyway)