Ashamed of being American

[Tripod]

I really don't mean to be disrespectful in any way or form but it's just one the things that's been irking me last week that makes me feel nothing but ashamed and before you guys start calling me a troll let me tell you I'm not and that I am the type of person who likes to have a debate and I do vent ALOT, but to get the core, I am ashamed and it's because of being American. I didn't want to clutter the Shoutbox with my ranting but conveying it all makes me get on a better note. Now to start my rant, which I know is probably going to cause a heapload of argumentative content, but I guess I should start anywho with how I feel about the law system, tell me what ****ing right do cops have to arrest innocent, American citizens, who actually do more then these so-called "cops" who feel the need to arrest citizens they frown upon because they always get a bad rep? For example, I stumbled across across a video of cops showcasing off their mindless behavior, to the people who always get bad rap from them, skaters. Cops always give them a hard time, and clearly the children are being handcuffed in front of their parents. If this is not being arrested then they are being assaulted. This attitude by the uniformed and armed authorities would not meet normal community policing standards of city ordinances as distinct from crimes. Why put young minors in jail, when they let criminals run free?:rolleyes:

Here's the video by the way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viHU3igaUfI

[Yoda]

My thoughts are these:

1) Do we have much context for the video? What were they arrested for, officially? There are rules about how you interact with cops, and it bugs me when people feel they should be able to say anything to them in any circumstance, but when they get arrested it's somehow a foul.

2) Cops misbehave sometimes. It happens. We live in a huge country, and it's going to happen. This doesn't excuse it, but it's also not a condemnation of America or American culture that it happens from time to time.

3) I'm not sure I understand "when they let criminals run free." Catching criminals is hard, I assume. I don't think the cops in this video had the choice of either arresting these kids or arresting some criminal standing just out of frame.

[Tripod]

My thoughts are these:

1) Do we have much context for the video? What were they arrested for, officially? There are rules about how you interact with cops, and it bugs me when people feel they should be able to say anything to them in any circumstance, but when they get arrested it's somehow a foul.

2) Cops misbehave sometimes. It happens. We live in a huge country, and it's going to happen. This doesn't excuse it, but it's also not a condemnation of America or American culture that it happens from time to time.

3) I'm not sure I understand "when they let criminals run free." Catching criminals is hard, I assume. I don't think the cops in this video had the choice of either arresting these kids or arresting some criminal standing just out of frame.

Well the kids were presumbaly arrested because the cops assumed they didn't have a permit to skate there, and they were skating at a church-sponsored event and DID have a permit, but the cops came and unlawfully arrested them and the skaters were probably giving them a hard time as well which explains their bitterness torwards them, so the cops went the different route, and decided to play the bad cop role on them. And the funny thing is, it's all the cops fault because the police wouldn't do any of this if they weren't disobedient or pre-agitated. On to the "criminals run free" part, when I say that I refer to how they let Casey Anthony off easy when she was flat out guilty and her poor child had to suffer because she wasn't ready to be a mother yet, but the only thing she was guilty of was lying to the police which makes me surprised that that's the only thing she was guilty of.

[will.15]

Aren't you the one who said in the Shoutbox the same thing and posted a video of skateboarders giving an old man a hard time and now you are not proud to be an American because cops are subduing unruly skateboarders???

You need better excuses not to be proud to be an American.

[Powdered Water]

If my parents were divorced and hung on secular balls. I'd be ashamed to be an American. Definitely.

[Yoda]

Well, those are reasonable assumptions, but they're still assumptions.

If I sound like an apologist for cops, it's because a) I think one bad apple spoils the whole bushel pretty effectively, PR-wise, and b) because if we put ourselves in the cops' shoes, I think it's probably really hard to tell when someone is just mouthing off and when they pose a danger, and if you guess wrong, you could die. That's pretty rough. It always looks terrible when they tackle someone for being verbally aggressive, or because they reach inside their jacket for a cigarette, but from the officer's POV that could be the last thing they see. It's a really tough thing to do in a split-second.

Clear, unfettered police bruality, however, makes me furious. But in my experience, in the overwhelming majority of cases, people are almost literally asking for it. That doesn't mean they deserve it, but that they are making a clear, repeated choice to antagonize a cop in a heated situation. I don't know what they expect to happen.

Re: Casey Anthony. I understand, but my point is that you're lumping the entire criminal justice system together, as if there's any real connection. What one cop does has nothing to do with another, necessarily, and in this case we're not even talking about comparing cops, but comparing cops to jurors, or District Attorneys. It's reasonable to grouse about, I suppose, but it's not a mark against these cops, or even cops in general.

[DexterRiley]

man this " one bad apple" phrase has gotta be shelved already. the country jingoism that is used to explain away every injustice it seems is getten tiresome.

[DexterRiley]

oh he posted a vid about skateboarders from 5 years ago getting harrassed.

nevermind. Skateboarders are a menace to society.

[Deadite]

Truly an American tragedy and cataclysmic failure of justice.

We are one step closer to a New World Order where skateboarders are hunted like animals, everyone has to have a microchip implanted to prove their allegiance to Lucifer (May He Reign Forever) and the dolphins leave Earth because it's a drag.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojydNb3Lrrs

[Yoda]

man this " one bad apple" phrase has gotta be shelved already. the country jingoism that is used to explain away every injustice it seems is getten tiresome.
I'm not sure how it's jingoism since both groups of people involved are American. But the way I see it the burden is on the accuser to show that this is indicative of a larger problem, and not a relatively isolated incident. It's more of a question than a refutation: how do we distinguish between an example of a bad police officer, and the example of a bad police force? Seems hard to do, especially from a video like this.

[bouncingbrick]

Waaa...I'm ashamed to be an American because some skateboarders were harrassed by the police! :rolleyes:

Every society has it's troubles, I dare you to find a country where this sort of thing never happens. Or you could go live in a country where they still have public stonings! Try being proud of that!

[TONGO]

Im less enthusiastic about the United States than in the past. We let big business and flawed media lead us by the nose. Comparing our countries to others is an even greater example of how far weve fallen as a nation. What?! You think comparing us to a 3rd world nation, and the grueling hardships they endure day in and out make us look superior? I think it makes us look soft as those same people would excel in a land rich with opportunities. Sadly we like all people are corruptible. Compare the fiber of our nation to itself, but 50 years ago, and youll realize we are a country in an expensive freefall.

[ash_is_the_gal]

not that i think the original post in this thread is exactly convincing of its point... but is there anyone here who doesn't think that America is more violent than some of its European counterparts?

[Tripod]

Aren't you the one who said in the Shoutbox the same thing and posted a video of skateboarders giving an old man a hard time and now you are not proud to be an American because cops are subduing unruly skateboarders???

You need better excuses not to be proud to be an American.

Yes, I did feel that way about the "old man" video but the reason I disliked that video was because many skaters do not respect things that do not belong to them. Many damage other people's private property. I understand it is the police's job to protect people's property. They get tired of writing damage reports too and I can totally understand how they can be constantly fed up with skaters because they always presume they're up to no good. But it's because of skaters like that in the "old guy kicks out skaters" video that make cops burden skaters, even the most innocent ones, and people become cops because they want to be authority figures. somewhere in the 90's they got it into their heads that skaters have no respect for authority. and a lot don't. but the problem is those few people are giving the rest of them a bad rap and cops jump to conclusions and judge you before they get to hear you call them "sir".

[honeykid]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc

[akatemple]

I used to hang around a lot of skaters and some are just good guys/girls trying to have a good time and skate, then there are the others that buy the skateboards and try to fit in but are really just there to try and cause some kind of trouble. That whole one bad apple thing works both ways.

Now about POLICE: I had had my drivers license for about 2 weeks when I got pulled over for speeding even though I was not speeding, the officer wrote me the ticket then told me that I could just pay him and I wouldn't have to go to court, I new that this was illegal but I figured what the hell and gave him the money, if something like that happened to me now it would have an entirely different outcome but I was young and naive and this was of course before every cop car had cameras on the dashboard.

I moved out to LA for a little over a year and in the first 2 weeks I was there I almost got arrested 6 times for really stupid stuff, it will take to long to go into detail, maybe it's just LA but the cops out there are harsh. I am told it's the way I dress and look, having my head shaved everyone is always telling me to smile more :). I have never been in Jail and never had a speeding ticket ( I really wasn't speeding when the above story happened) I have done nothing wrong and I still get harassed by the police on a regular basis.
So yeah I have no positive feelings about cops, but I don't hate America because of that.

Now if you wanted to discuss the health care and job situation or maybe congress not agreeing on anything good even though it makes perfect sense just because the republicans won't agree with the democrats or the other way around. That is a whole different story and yes America has went downhill a ton in the past 15 plus years, but I have to say the cops play a small part in that.


If you want someone to channel all that hate towards then look no further.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGRYPYuFZLk

[will.15]

Are there really cops still shaking motorists down for bribe money? I thought that went out with prohibition. What state was that?

[akatemple]

North Carolina - 15 years ago

[Deadite]

The solution is simple: make the cops use skateboards.

I'm kidding, of course. It's obvious the cops are terrorists working for the CFR who are the real terrorists who blamed 9/11 on the fake terrorists but who work for the REAL real terrorists, the Reptilians. It's all in The Bible, somewhere in that cool part at the end with the dragons and plagues and stuff, and by "The Bible" I mean National Enquirer

Aren't puppies cute?

.http://www.funnypuppysite.com/pictures/cutest_puppy_ever.jpg

[gandalf26]

You should not be ashamed to be an "American". You should be ashamed of your Leaders, Governments, Banks, Corporations and Intelligence agencies. If you can support Ron Paul then I believe USA can start down the right path again instead of the profitable Corporate path.

As for the Cops I don't like to brand them all bad. I think the cops have too much of an us or them brotherhood mentallity. They generally only socialise with each other and are encouraged not to mix with the gerneral population. I remember reading about a guy who did not pass the Police application because he was considered "too smart". I think a lot of Police were bullied at school and are not exactly smart.

[Oktober]

If you can support Ron Paul then I believe USA can start down the right path again instead of the profitable Corporate path.


LOL! Oh yeah ... & read plenty of Friedrich (Von) Hayek as well! :rotfl:

Sorry, gandalf26, you should really think about developing a stand-up routine. You'd be hilarious!

[bouncingbrick]

Why are so many people hating on the police? My wife used to be a police officer and I have friends that still are cops. It's not an easy job, people. Every single person you encounter in your job could be the person that kills you. Even people you pull over for a traffic stop and kids riding skateboards. If that sort of situation doesn't allow for a certain level of force and precaution then I don't know what does.

Concerning the brotherhood aspect, if a police officer can't count on the people backing him up then he is in a bad spot. They get along the way they do because most of the time they have to. That's one of the reasons my wife stopped being an officer, she didn't feel she could always count on the people she worked with.

Now, of course there are bad seeds in every group, but does that mean we have to hate the police? It'd be absurd to do so, wouldn't it? Besides, these are the people that you would all call on in an emergency situation. If your relationship with them is based on constant distrust, what do you do when encountered with a situation that requires their help?

[Deadite]

Was that supposed to make me wanna trust police more?

[Deadite]

I mean, you basically made cops sound like a bunch of paranoid maniacs ready to shoot kids and turn on each other.

[wintertriangles]

I don't get how one video of something that happens ALL THE TIME would make you think that. There's other places to point that earn the title of shame

[Tripod]

Welcome to America. Where the obesity rate gets higher because damn kids can't get enough McRibs, and where police think that just because they have shiny boots and a badge they feel the need to view non-cops as lower life-forms. When I said England was a better place, I wasn't kidding. Now I know why sometimes English people have elitism against Americans and such, and I don't blame them..

[akatemple]

Why are so many people hating on the police? My wife used to be a police officer and I have friends that still are cops. It's not an easy job, people. Every single person you encounter in your job could be the person that kills you. Even people you pull over for a traffic stop and kids riding skateboards. If that sort of situation doesn't allow for a certain level of force and precaution then I don't know what does.

If you allow yourself to start thinking like that then you should be the last person carrying a gun, if you are thinking that any second you could die from someone you pass on the sidewalk or someone you pull over then you are going to become paranoid and end up doing something like the cops in the video or worse.

[Deadite]

Welcome to America. Where the obesity rate gets higher because damn kids can't get enough McRibs, and where police think that just because they have shiny boots and a badge they feel the need to view non-cops as lower life-forms. When I said England was a better place, I wasn't kidding. Now I know why sometimes English people have elitism against Americans and such, and I don't blame them..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAMfCG6nn1w

[Deadite]

If you allow yourself to start thinking like that then you should be the last person carrying a gun, if you are thinking that any second you could die from someone you pass on the sidewalk or someone you pull over then you are going to become paranoid and end up doing something like the cops in the video or worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4G4mcYOXMA&feature=related

[Oktober]

When I said England was a better place, I wasn't kidding. Now I know why sometimes English people have elitism against Americans and such, and I don't blame them..

Oh yeah, don't get me started about The West Midlands Serious Frame Squad & I don't even want to mention 'kettling'. :(

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Kettling#United_Kingdom

[akatemple]

After watching The Red Riding Trilogy I'm not to big on the British Police force.

[will.15]

How can you be ashamed of being an American when you see something like this?

Benny Hill rules!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUYbu5DJA1U

[Oktober]

After watching The Red Riding Trilogy I'm not to big on the British Police force.

I've not seen the trilogy, They were shown on Channel 4 (TV) originally. C4 used to be good with drama/documentaries many years ago. I remember living in Wales & watching S4C (Sianel Pedwar Cymru) & not being able to watch a lot of daytime TV in English. They did show English speaking programmes as well though. Either way, it's the sort of thing Channel 4 used to do well before digital channels took over more. But, concerning 'Red Riding' remember:

"Though real crimes are featured, the scripts are fictionalised and dramatised versions of events rather than contemporary factual accounts." ~ Wikipedia

I think that the police are the same in every country more or less. They are just human beings like all of the rest of us. There are good apples & rotten apples. I think, apart from a lot of corruption issues, many English & Welsh police forces allowed themselves to be used politically during the Thatcher years. Particularly during the coalminer's strikes. This divided many Welsh, Midlands & Northern communities so badly the scars have yet to heal. I find it difficult to forgive the West Mercian Police for many of the things that happened during those times. To be fair, one or two policemen came forward & admitted they were ordered to start a lot of the violence & pin it on the miners. This & they were helped by the Murdoch press to point the finger at strikers. And we know where those orders ultimately came from, don't we?

[Oktober]

How can you be ashamed of being an American when you see something like this?

Benny Hill rules!

You know no one in England ever really watched the Benny Hill show don't you? :p

[Used Future]

Welcome to America...When I said England was a better place, I wasn't kidding.

Welcome to England where service with a smile has been replaced by service with a face like a smacked arse, and a loogie in your meal.

Where the £25 fillet steak is the size of a postage stamp and tough as old boots.

It's not all bad in America you know. ;)

[Oktober]

Yeah, Limey bashing ... that always makes Americans feel better.

[Deadite]

Only when using real sticks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY1k3-92SMY

[Tripod]

Welcome to England where service with a smile has been replaced by service with a face like a smacked arse, and a loogie in your meal.

Where the £25 fillet steak is the size of a postage stamp and tough as old boots.

It's not all bad in America you know. ;)

Toddlers get treated with REAL, ettique, cuisine for lunch in France and us American's from toddler to teen (and this is coming from a teen) are stuck with processed, grotesque looking food that make us American's keep on going back for it more. Meanwhile, college/high school kids are risking getting tickets and speeding in their car just to get McDonald's for their lunch break. Even toddlers in France are getting served a real French cuisine and have class. Why is it that the French have a balanced meal plan and fast food is dominating America just to make a quick buck?:rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovO18E-hgew

[Oktober]

Only when using real sticks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY1k3-92SMY

That's a big stick.

[Fiscal]

I remember when I was an angst filled high schooler. I still loved my country, though.

[Oktober]

Toddlers get treated with REAL, ettique, cuisine for lunch in France and us American's from toddler to teen (and this is coming from a teen) are stuck with processed, grotesque looking food that make us American's keep on going back for it more. Meanwhile, college/high school kids are risking getting tickets and speeding in their car just to get McDonald's for their lunch break. Even toddlers in France are getting served a real French cuisine and have class. Why is it that the French have a balanced meal plan and fast food is dominating America just to make a quick buck?:rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovO18E-hgew

Yes, but French beer is all tasteless pasteurised lager. I know, I've drank it. I like the idea of two hour dinner breaks though.

[Deadite]

That's a big stick.

Of course. We supersize everything. And if ya mess with us, you'll catch a supersized asswhoopin. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slKNd22GGaQ

[will.15]

I'd rather be American than French.



Jan 29, 2010

it seems many canadians are offended by the reasons america is better than canada list. just to assauge canadians' hurt feelings about the subject, here is another nation that america is superior to. I refer to france.

number 10--we have a space program. france doesn't.

number 9--we have five times as many people.

number 8--we have new york city, france has Paris.

number 7--we are a superpower; france ia a minor country.

number 6--we have a larger economy than france.

number 5--we have disneyworld, seaworld and the playboy mansion; france has the effiel tower.

number 4--we saved france's bacon during WW2.

number 3--without us france would still be a german province and the french would be speaking german.

number 2--we have hotter women than france.

and the number one reason america is better than france--WE'RE NOT FRANCE.

[Oktober]

Of course. We supersize everything.

Yeah, fat is the new thin.

And if ya mess with us, you'll catch a supersized asswhoopin. :)

You can keep the tax-exile Mr Bowie as a punishment & a bleak reminder of just how bad everything he did after the Scary Monsters album was. ;)

[Oktober]

I'd rather be American than French.

number 10--we have a space program. france doesn't.

Ermmm ... actually, they do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5

[Deadite]

We might be fat but at least we brush our teeth. :D

[Oktober]

We might be fat but at least we brush our teeth. :D

Byte me! :D

[will.15]

Ermmm ... actually, they do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5
Okay, I'll substitute that with:

American politicians only commit sex crimes in America, they don't go to france to do it.

[Oktober]

Okay, I'll substitute that with:

American politicians only commit sex crimes in America, they don't go to france to do it.

More fool them, they'd probably get more votes & a medal from the French President.

[Yoda]

Ermmm ... actually, they do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5
That's adorable.

[Oktober]

That's adorable.

What annoys me is that Ariane was based on a British design. We sold it to the French as we couldn't afford Black Knight & Concorde.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Black_Knight_%28rocket%29

I meant Black Arrow

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Black_Arrow

[Oktober]

Anyway, they eat McFood in France ... I've seen them.

Jules/Samuel L Jackson ~ "But I do love the taste of a good burger. You know what they call a Quarter Pounder with cheese in France?" ~ Pulp Fiction

[will.15]

[quote=Tripod;775634]Toddlers get treated with REAL, ettique, cuisine for lunch in France and us American's from toddler to teen (and this is coming from a teen) are stuck with processed, grotesque looking food that make us American's keep on going back for it more. Meanwhile, college/high school kids are risking getting tickets and speeding in their car just to get McDonald's for their lunch break. Even toddlers in France are getting served a real French cuisine and have class. Why is it that the French have a balanced meal plan and fast food is dominating America just to make a quick buck?:rolleyes:


Culture (http://www.americansinfrance.net/culture/index.cfm)http://www.americansinfrance.net/images/transparent.gifMcDonalds in France
There are over 800 McDonalds in France, and José Bové (the farmer turned activist who in an act of civil disobedience drove a tractor into a McDonalds) aside, the French just love McDo (pronounced Mac Dough) as it's called in France. The first McDonalds in France was built in 1979 and is located in Strasbourg's Les Hall shopping center.
The French did at one time have a love/hate relationship with McDonalds; it was seen as part of an American cultural invasion. That seems to be past as McDonalds has so become a part of French culture that it's not seen as an American import any longer, but wholly French. In short, McDonalds has grown on the French just like in so many other countries.
I've been to a few McDonalds in France and, except for one in Strasbourg that looks from the outside to be built in the traditional Alsacien style, all McDonalds in France that I have seen look no different than their American counterparts.
Yes, there are those that still curse McDo (They are now a very small group and mostly ignored.) as the symbol of the Americanization of France and who also see it as France losing its uniqueness in terms of cuisine. The menu in a French McDonalds is almost an exact copy of what you would find in any McDonalds in the United States. It struck me as a bit odd that I could order as I would in the United States, that is in English, with the odd French preposition thrown in.
If truth were told, the French who eat at McDonalds are just as much at home there as any American could be.

[Oktober]

McFood will never beat Wimpys!

http://www.wimpy.uk.com/

[mark f]

Welcome to England where service with a smile has been replaced by service with a face like a smacked arse, and a loogie in your meal.

Where the £25 fillet steak is the size of a postage stamp and tough as old boots.

It's not all bad in America you know. ;)

Yeah, Limey bashing ... that always makes Americans feel better.

You do realize that Used Future is a "Limey"...

[Yoda]

I feel like the overwhelming majority of arguments in this thread are about cultural stereotypes and broad generalizations.

[Oktober]

You do realize that Used Future is a "Limey"...

Of course I realised it (I may be lying about this) I have difficulty understanding how they speak south of the Watford Gap. Maybe Used Future's a southerner & the accent threw me.

[Deadite]

Where did you get that idea, Yoda?

Anyways, about McDo's.... At least they try to make Brits feel welcome too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBuKuA9nHsw

[Oktober]

I feel like the overwhelming majority of arguments in this thread are about cultural stereotypes and broad generalizations.

Not necessarily true, I've met French people who don't drive like homicidal maniacs & can park properly.

[will.15]

McFood will never beat Wimpys!

http://www.wimpy.uk.com/
Popeye can beat Wimpy's ass!
http://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop.pnghttp://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop2.jpghttp://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop3.jpghttp://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop4.jpg

[will.15]

I feel like the overwhelming majority of arguments in this thread are about cultural stereotypes and broad generalizations.

Only you and Tripod are taking this discussion seriously (and Tripod may be trolling, which would just leave you).

[Oktober]

Popeye can beat Wimpy's ass!
http://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop.pnghttp://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop2.jpghttp://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop3.jpghttp://popeyescouponsmenu.com/wp-content/uploads/_pop4.jpg


Maybe, but do they sell a decent vindaloo or faal?

[Oktober]

Anyways, about McDo's.... At least they try to make Brits feel welcome too.

You do realise that you guys drive on the same side of the road as the French right? I'm not going to read anything into that btw ...

[will.15]

Maybe, but do they sell a decent vindaloo or faal?
Popeye doesn't even know how to spell that.

[Oktober]

Popeye doesn't even know how to spell that.

He should ask Olive Oyl or get a good spellchecker. ;)

[will.15]

If England wasn't so mean to the Puritans there would never be a United States.

[Tripod]

Only you and Tripod are taking this discussion seriously (and Tripod may be trolling, which would just leave you).

You know I don't hate America, but their attitude towards race and stuff is shockingly backwards, even now.

[Deadite]

You do realise that you guys drive on the same side of the road as the French right? I'm not going to read anything into that btw ...

Ah, that must be an example of the superior british linguistic skills I've heard so much about. :)

[Oktober]

Ah, that must be an example of the superior british linguistic skills I've heard so much about. :)

So, speaking semiotically & counting various indigenous linguistic tropes, nuances & dialects, when you say British, do you mean *English, Welsh Gaelic, Manx Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic or Cornish Gaelic? As there's no such language as 'British'.

*Is that Frisian, Anglo-Saxon, Mercian, post Danelaw Norse, Norman, Chancery or Middle English?

[Oktober]

If England wasn't so mean to the Puritans there would never be a United States.

I've never been mean to the Puritans. (They asked for it, they started it anyway ... I blame Cromwell for cancelling Christmas)

[Fiscal]

So, speaking semiotically & counting various indigenous linguistic tropes, nuances & dialects, when you say British, do you mean *English, Welsh Gaelic, Manx Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic or Cornish Gaelic? As there's no such language as 'British'.

*Is that Frisian, Anglo-Saxon, Mercian, post Danelaw Norse, Norman, Chancery or Middle English?

http://joymachine.typepad.com/northern_planner/images/2008/04/24/rlove_tea_uk_20070709_2.jpg

[Deadite]

You know I don't hate America, but their attitude towards race and stuff is shockingly backwards, even now.

Yeah, you're right. Never mind the diversity and laws protecting against discrimination, America is RACIST.

[Deadite]

http://joymachine.typepad.com/northern_planner/images/2008/04/24/rlove_tea_uk_20070709_2.jpg

Yeah, those guys. :D

[Oktober]

Yeah, those guys. :D

People who drink tea & went to university?

[Deadite]

People who drink tea & went to university?

And the lifted pinky. Don't forget the lifted pinky.

[Tripod]

Yeah, you're right. Never mind the diversity and laws protecting against discrimination, America is RACIST.

I lol'd. It's not just racism. America's got it just as bad, with it's racism, obesity, homophobia, and fascism. If the French are always blatantly accused of having it, America has it just as worse.

[Oktober]

http://joymachine.typepad.com/northern_planner/images/2008/04/24/rlove_tea_uk_20070709_2.jpg

Yeah, let's equate intelligence with etiquette & affectation. There's no danger of racial or cultural stereotyping there then.

MY GOD ... HE'S NOT WEARING A TIE ... THE BOUNDER ...

*Drops monocle & copy of The Times on my muffins*

[Oktober]

And the lifted pinky. Don't forget the lifted pinky.

Well, that goes without saying doesn't it squire? Otherwise you won't be able to dunk your chocolate digestives in your Earl Grey properly ... & we can't have that.

[Deadite]

I lol'd. It's not just racism. America's got it just as bad, with it's racism, obesity, homophobia, and fascism. If the French are always blatantly accused of having it, America has it just as worse.

What?

[Oktober]

I lol'd. It's not just racism. America's got it just as bad, with it's racism, obesity, homophobia, and fascism. If the French are always blatantly accused of having it, America has it just as worse.

Have you ever actually been to France? The French love everybody ... except La Roast Beefs.

Anyway, we don't eat roast beef every day, sometimes we have Vegemite sandwiches. I'd rather eat roast beef than amphibious limbs any day!

[Deadite]

Well, that goes without saying doesn't it squire? Otherwise you won't be able to dunk your chocolate digestives in your Earl Grey properly ... & we can't have that.

That would be so much funnier if we could hear the accent. Y'all sure do talk funny.

[mark f]

Don't be so blatant. I know plenty of "Americans" who do that. Of course there are as many different kinds of Americans as there are kinds of any different national group, especially those who speak "English".

[will.15]

Australians talk funny, too.

[Oktober]

That would be so much funnier if we could hear the accent. Y'all sure do talk funny.

We have a lot of funny accents, from Scouse, Geordie & Mancunian to Black Country, West Country, Estuary & Cockney.

My parents were born in the Black Country, I can speak & understand the dialect fluently.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:If_yowm_saft_enuff.jpg

[Deadite]

Australians talk funny, too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--CzCeOJXfA

[Oktober]

Australians talk funny, too.

How about New Zealanders? There is a difference between Aussie & Kiwi as well.

[will.15]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE74bNigkm4

[Deadite]

That was cool. :cool:

[honeykid]

You know no one in England ever really watched the Benny Hill show don't you? :p
C'mon! We loved Benny Hill. We don't like to admit it anymore, but we did. BTW, that theme tune would be my choice as our national anthem. That'd be ****ing great. Hell, it might even make it worth staging the Olympics next year.

Think of it. British athlete on the top step, gold medal round their neck. The flag starts to rise, cue music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcNhDstL4-k


I remember when I was an angst filled high schooler. I still loved my country, though.
Really? Why? Not singling out the US, why love any country? It's an accident of birth and one you had no choice about. I can sort of understand loving where you live, in a local sense, but not a country.

Why is it that the French have a balanced meal plan and fast food is dominating America just to make a quick buck?:rolleyes:
I think you've answered your own question in that sentence.

I'd rather be American than French.
number 10--we have a space program. france doesn't.
As has already been pointed out, wrong.

number 9--we have five times as many people.
And this is a good thing why, exactly?

number 8--we have new york city, france has Paris.
Exactly!

number 7--we are a superpower; france ia a minor country.
Minor country?

number 6--we have a larger economy than france.
This is true.

number 5--we have disneyworld, seaworld and the playboy mansion; france has the effiel tower.
Again, I don't know why you'd boast about this.

number 4--we saved france's bacon during WW2.
The US were a part of the effort to win WW2, yes.

number 3--without us france would still be a german province and the french would be speaking german.
:facepalm:

number 2--we have hotter women than france.
This one's close, but I'm inclined to agree. However, I'd like to do more research. ;)

and the number one reason america is better than france--WE'RE NOT FRANCE.
Yep. The US is definately not France.

We might be fat but at least we brush our teeth. :D
Brits actually have the HEALTHIEST TEETH IN THE WORLD!! Fact. (I'll be honest, I'm surprised about this too.)

Not necessarily true, I've met French people who don't drive like homicidal maniacs & can park properly.
Possibly, but I bet you've not met an Asian you can say that about.

If England wasn't so mean to the Puritans there would never be a United States.
This is not true. Also, the creation of an independent US owes a lot to the French. That's gotta hurt.

Have you ever actually been to France? The French love everybody ... except La Roast Beefs.

Anyway, we don't eat roast beef every day, sometimes we have Vegemite sandwiches. I'd rather eat roast beef than amphibious limbs any day!
Vegemite?!?! I don't think you're British at all.

How about New Zealanders? There is a difference between Aussie & Kiwi as well.
There is, but it's so much funnier when you tell them there isn't and that they sound exactly the same. It's also good form to ask them which pub they work at when you meet them for the first time. They love that one, though it does tend to be more Aussies than Kiwi's. Kiwi's also wait tables.


As we're messing with stereotypes and such, can I ask all Americans to stay in the US. That, or send different citizens. I went to the US and everyone was really polite, gracious, spoke at a reasonable volume, dressed normally (well, mostly :D) and were just good, decent people. Those who visit/vacation outside the country tend to do/be the complete opposite in my experience.

I would make a joke at the Scotch expense, but all the stereotypes are true... Including the one about them not having a sense of humour about these things. :p

[Fiscal]

Really? Why? Not singling out the US, why love any country? It's an accident of birth and one you had no choice about. I can sort of understand loving where you live, in a local sense, but not a country.

I've lived all over the country, I watched my pops go to work everyday serving the country as a pilot for 23 years. Even in high school I valued my countries founding documents and history and I even knew people that died for our freedoms that I value. Its pretty simple, really.

I acknowledge that there are problems, but these problems occur in any landmass that human beings inhabit. You can't say the same thing about the successes of my country, a lot of it is limited to my country alone.

[will.15]

And we're not French.

[honeykid]

And we're not French.
That's one thing I'll never hold against you. :D

[DexterRiley]

I've lived all over the country, I watched my pops go to work everyday serving the country as a pilot for 23 years. Even in high school I valued my countries founding documents and history and I even knew people that died for our freedoms that I value. Its pretty simple, really.

I acknowledge that there are problems, but these problems occur in any landmass that human beings inhabit. You can't say the same thing about the successes of my country, a lot of it is limited to my country alone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRMwVvlmLgI

[will.15]

That guy is annoying.

Couldn't you post a right wing veteran who didn't have a whiny voice?

[honeykid]

Well, that's George W ruled out on both counts. :D

[mark f]

I think will's list about France vs. the U. S. is from David Letterman's scripters.

[Used Future]

Maybe Used Future's a southerner & the accent threw me.

Actually I'm a Welshman so your accent theory still works out :D

[Oktober]

C'mon! We loved Benny Hill. We don't like to admit it anymore, but we did. BTW, that theme tune would be my choice as our national anthem.

That might work although I still like 'Jerusalem'.

Possibly, but I bet you've not met an Asian you can say that about.

Depends if they're driving a taxi or not.

This is not true. Also, the creation of an independent US owes a lot to the French. That's gotta hurt.

This is probably why both the US & France drive on the 'other' side of the road & drink horrible fizzy pasteurised lager beer.

Vegemite?!?! I don't think you're British at all.

It just spreads better than Marmite. ;)

There is, but it's so much funnier when you tell them there isn't and that they sound exactly the same. It's also good form to ask them which pub they work at when you meet them for the first time. They love that one, though it does tend to be more Aussies than Kiwi's. Kiwi's also wait tables.

LOL! I wonder how many times Russell Crowe has been asked about exactly where in Australia he was born?

[Oktober]

Actually I'm a Welshman so your accent theory still works out :D

Bore da. Sut ydych chi?

[Oktober]

I've lived all over the country, I watched my pops go to work everyday serving the country as a pilot for 23 years. Even in high school I valued my countries founding documents and history and I even knew people that died for our freedoms that I value. Its pretty simple, really.

My grandfather fought with the RAF in WW2. He helped defeat the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain in 1940. Virtually all of those pilots were either British, Anzac, Canadian, Commonwealth or Poles. I, like most citizens, value my country's values & freedoms & those who died to protect them. What's your point?

You can't say the same thing about the successes of my country, a lot of it is limited to my country alone.

Yes, it certainly is:

The CIA has been organizing “regime change” for 50 years. They have removed many governments that are unfriendly to US corporate interests and replaced them with regimes that are more likely to work closely and slavishly to carry out the economic and geopolitical desires of the US corporate elite.

In early 1963, Saddam had more important things to worry about than his outstanding bill at the Andiana Cafe. On February 8, a military coup in Baghdad, in which the Baath Party played a leading role, overthrew Qassim. Support for the conspirators was limited. In the first hours of fighting, they had only nine tanks under their control. The Baath Party had just 850 active members. But Qassim ignored warnings about the impending coup. What tipped the balance against him was the involvement of the United States.


~ Richard Sanders



(1)

The real reason we waged war with Iraq is that in November, 2000 Saddam Hussein refused to accept the U.S. dollar for his oil, and instead switched to the euro. Hussein also made a dramatic move by switching all of his U.N. reserves from the dollar to the euro. Thus, our invasion was nothing more than an attempt to maintain the dollar’s monopoly on oil purchases throughout the world. Stated differently, we wanted there to be no other choice than the dollar as the world’s sole petro-currency. Our attack, then, was an example to other countries – don’t convert your system over to the euro, and don’t challenge the dollar’s dominance.

And today, even though the U.S. is mired in a godawful war, we did thwart a widespread move to an alternate currency. In addition, we’ve also encircled the Middle East with military bases (especially Iran) so that any future uprisings or shifts away from “popular convention” can be immediately quelled.

To prove this is what happened, ask yourself: what is the first thing the United States did in 2003 after invading Iraq? Answer: after our troops “shocked and awed” their way into Baghdad, they immediately set-up a central bank! Now think about this scenario. We’re in the middle of a war, and what do we do first, above and beyond everything else? We set-up a bank! How much importance do you think this notion has? An enormous amount.

We then ripped-up all of Saddam’s old euro-based oil contracts, switched everything back to the dollar, and tied the whole damn thing back into the Federal Reserve. Our planners also cut-off the euro-based Oil-for-Food program within two months of “Mission Accomplished.”

Now when you think back to America’s invasion of Iraq, why do you think so many countries were perturbed by our actions? It’s because our Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) nullified all of the previous euro-based oil contracts that Saddam Hussein made between 1997-2002 with countries such as France, Russia, and China. The total worth of these agreements totaled $1.1 trillion! They all disappeared into thin air, and had to be renegotiated in dollars.

~ Victor Thorn

(2)

George Bush planned "regime change" in Iraq before becoming United States President in January 2001. The events of September 11, 2001, were the pretext for invasion of Iraq, not the reason.

The blueprint for the creation of a "global Pax America", to which Bush subscribes and which is driving the invasion of Iraq, was drawn up in September 2000 for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush (George's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff).

The document, called Rebuilding America's Defences: strategies, forces and resources for a new century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think tank Project for the New American Century.

According to the document, written three months before Bush became president, "the US for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The document outlines the global ambitions of the Bush Administration. It sets out a "blueprint for maintaining global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests".

~ Kenneth Davidson

(3)

We all know that the U.S. is the worlds economic leader, but few people understand how the U.S. maintains its dominance. The answer lies the in the U.S. Dollar. The Dollar is the de facto world reserve currency it accounts for approximately two thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths of all foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are denominated in Dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in Dollars.

But the more dollars there are circulating outside the U.S., or invested by foreign owners in American assets, the more the rest of the world has had to provide the U.S. with goods and services in exchange for these dollars. The dollars cost the U.S. next to nothing to produce, so the fact that the world uses the currency in this way means that the U.S. is importing vast quantities of goods and services virtually for free.

Since so many foreign-owned dollars are not spent on American goods and services, the U.S. is able to run a huge trade deficit year after year without apparently any major economic consequences. The most recently published figures, for example, show that in November of last year U.S. imports were worth 48% more than U.S. exports. No other country can run such a large trade deficit with impunity. The financial media tell us the U.S. is acting as the ‘consumer of last resort’ and the implication is that we should be thankful, but a more enlightening description of this state of affairs would be to say that it is getting a massive interest-free loan from the rest of the world.

However, with Europes introduction of the Euro, things are beginning to change. One of the stated economic objectives, and perhaps the primary objective, when setting up the Euro was to turn it into a reserve currency to challenge the Dollar so that Europe too could get something for nothing.

This however would be a disaster for the U.S. Not only would they lose a large part of their annual subsidy of effectively free goods and services, but countries switching to Euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring down the value of the U.S. currency. Imports would start to cost Americans a lot more and as increasing numbers of those holding dollars began to spend them, the U.S. would have to start paying its debts by supplying in goods and services to foreign countries, thus reducing American living standards. As countries and businesses converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the U.S. property and stock market bubbles would, without doubt, burst. The Federal Reserve would no longer be able to print more money to reflate the bubble, as it is currently openly considering doing, because, without lots of eager foreigners prepared to mop them up, a serious inflation would result which, in turn, would make foreigners even more reluctant to hold the U.S. currency and thus heighten the crisis.

~ Chris Brunner

(4)

To hear supporters of George Bush now, the only reason he invaded Iraq was to introduce democracy to that country, and the reasons we are still there are to combat the terrorists who entered Iraq after we invaded and to save face. But in the weeks and months leading up to the invasion it was quite a different story. Back then the Bush Administration's pitch to the American people was: "Saddam Hussein has chemical and biological weapons and even nuclear weapons that he plans to give to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda who will then smuggle them into the United States and kill tens of thousands of people." Even if you knew nothing about Iraqi history and politics, this argument should have appeared dubious on the face of it. In the terrorist attacks that have taken place inside the United States, including the World Trade Center bombing of 1993, Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City and the 9/11 attacks, none of the perpetrators needed to smuggle weapons into the country. Whatever they needed, they found right here inside the United States.

I believe that there were three important informal groups within the Bush Administration that were anxious to invade Iraq, although certain individuals belonged to more than one group. These groups were 1) war profiteers 2) neo-conservative ideologues and 3) supporters of Israel.

~ David Wallenchinsky

These articles may be a bit dated now, but note that they are all written by Americans.

[Used Future]

Bore da. Sut ydych chi?

Yn dda iawn diolch.:)

[Oktober]

Yn dda iawn diolch.:)

I'm glad to hear that.

[earlsmoviepicks]

Speak Welsh if you want to, but please be careful speaking French. A buddy of mine tried it, his throat constricted and he died.

[bouncingbrick]

My grandfather fought with the RAF in WW2. He helped defeat the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain in 1940. Virtually all of those pilots were either British, Anzac, Canadian, Commonwealth or Poles. I, like most citizens...These groups were 1) war profiteers 2) neo-conservative ideologues and 3) supporters of Israel.

~ David Wallenchinsky

These articles may be a bit dated now, but note that they are all written by Americans.

What the hell is this? What does this post have to do with anything? What are you trying to say?

Plus, what is the validity of anything you've quoted? Who are those people? Are they legitimite people with actual hard facts or are they people with a specific agenda?

What the hell is going on with this post?!?

[Oktober]

What the hell is this? What does this post have to do with anything? What are you trying to say?

It was a reply to Fiscal. All I'm saying is that anyone can be proud of their country's military & its values. I am just as proud of my country as Fiscal is of his.

Plus, what is the validity of anything you've quoted?

Well, you can't really argue with the following facts can you?

The CIA has been organizing “regime change” for 50 years. They have removed many governments that are unfriendly to US corporate interests and replaced them with regimes that are more likely to work closely and slavishly to carry out the economic and geopolitical desires of the US corporate elite.

This is not a matter of conjecture.

In early 1963, Saddam had more important things to worry about than his outstanding bill at the Andiana Cafe. On February 8, a military coup in Baghdad, in which the Baath Party played a leading role, overthrew Qassim. Support for the conspirators was limited. In the first hours of fighting, they had only nine tanks under their control. The Baath Party had just 850 active members. But Qassim ignored warnings about the impending coup. What tipped the balance against him was the involvement of the United States.


~ Richard Sanders

Nor the original support of Saddam Hussain from the US military.

Who are those people? Are they legitimite people with actual hard facts or are they people with a specific agenda?

AFAIK they are predominantly American political writers/journalists. You cannot deny that the US has used many underhanded means to safeguard its oil sources. Politically & economically it is understandable. The trouble is, there are always consequences. I think being able to write articles like this is known as 'free speech'.

What the hell is going on with this post?!?

Well, if people are going to start to polish their little flagpoles, people are going to ask questions.

[bouncingbrick]

Well, if people are going to start to polish their little flagpoles, people are going to ask questions.

So you need to drag possible conspiracies into a debate about pride in coutry? Is that what this is?

The problem I've always had with the "we fought in Iraq because of the oil" thing is most of the US oil supply comes from Canada. Strangely we've not started a war with them...

Again, you have no validity in what you posted because the people you are quoting have no background info that I know of. Anyone with a grudge against the Republican party could have written that stuff. The only thing I can't say is bogus is the CIA has funded regime changes. I'm not proud of that, but if you can name one country that hasn't taken advantage of political change/unrest in self-interest I'll give you a big sloppy kiss on the cheek. Hell, most US elections are won off the back of the winds of political change.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, stop pointing fingers because everyone has done dirty things. Pointing fingers proves nothing.

[Yoda]

I'm a little confused as to why someone saying they're proud of the country needs to be taken down a peg. Unless you think being proud of your country necessarily implies a belief in its infallibility.

[Fiscal]

It was a reply to Fiscal. All I'm saying is that anyone can be proud of their country's military & its values. I am just as proud of my country as Fiscal is of his.


You obviously didn't read what I was replying to, because you are making my exact point. Honeykid asked why I could love my country so I simply stated some reasons.

[Brodinski]

I envy how Americans can show so much love for their country. I wish my countrymen would show some more patriotism...

[Oktober]

So you need to drag possible conspiracies into a debate about pride in coutry? Is that what this is?

I didn't start a 'debate' about pride in one's country. Fiscal made a statement & I answered it with a quote from Americans with an alternative view on Iraq. How much in those posts is conspiracy & how much is fact? Much of it is true.

1/ November, 2000 Saddam Hussein refused to accept the U.S. dollar for his oil, and instead switched to the euro. Hussein also made a dramatic move by switching all of his U.N. reserves from the dollar to the euro.

2/ what is the first thing the United States did in 2003 after invading Iraq? ... they immediately set-up a central bank! Now think about this scenario. We’re in the middle of a war, and what do we do first, above and beyond everything else? We set-up a bank!

3/ We then ripped-up all of Saddam’s old euro-based oil contracts, switched everything back to the dollar, and tied the whole damn thing back into the Federal Reserve. Our planners also cut-off the euro-based Oil-for-Food program within two months of “Mission Accomplished.”

These three points are not just conspiracy.

The Dollar is the de facto world reserve currency it accounts for approximately two thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths of all foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are denominated in Dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in Dollars.

However, with Europes introduction of the Euro, things are beginning to change. One of the stated economic objectives, and perhaps the primary objective, when setting up the Euro was to turn it into a reserve currency to challenge the Dollar so that Europe too could get something for nothing.

Well, looks like Europe's plans to also get something for nothing didn't work out as well!

The problem I've always had with the "we fought in Iraq because of the oil" thing is most of the US oil supply comes from Canada. Strangely we've not started a war with them...

So why all of the US military presence in the Mid East then? What about George W. Bush's connections to the Saudi royal family? Where do the Canadians get their oil from? Why isn't Canada a member of OPEC if it produces so much oil?

Again, you have no validity in what you posted because the people you are quoting have no background info that I know of.

Oh, so none of it can possibly be true because you choose not to believe it? I wonder just how much of it actually is true? I wouldn't say it had no validity at all. Some of the things stated are true, as I have stated.

Anyone with a grudge against the Republican party could have written that stuff.

It doesn't make them necessarily wrong or invalid though either, does it?

The only thing I can't say is bogus is the CIA has funded regime changes. I'm not proud of that, but if you can name one country that hasn't taken advantage of political change/unrest in self-interest

Which, in a way, is my point. No empire has been totally benevolent or blameless. BP was originally created by my country to take advantage of the Persian oil fields.

I'll give you a big sloppy kiss on the cheek. Hell, most US elections are won off the back of the winds of political change.

I'll pass on the kiss.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, stop pointing fingers because everyone has done dirty things. Pointing fingers proves nothing.

Pointing fingers? I'm just posting an alternative view written by some of your fellow countrymen. Why are you so defensive?

[Oktober]

You obviously didn't read what I was replying to, because you are making my exact point.

"You can't say the same thing about the successes of my country, a lot of it is limited to my country alone. "

Which can also be said of many other countries. For instance, my country started the Industrial Revolution which eventually precipitated the electronic revolution, which enabled a Second World War GPO engineer called Tommy Flowers MBE, to construct the world's first electronic computer, leading inadvertently to the cyberspace world we have today. We were also the biggest & probably most brutal empire the world has ever seen. Was that empire a 'success' or not compared to creating the Industrial Revolution? I suppose it all depends on your point of view. Which was my point.

I just don't really see what your exact point actually was.

[will.15]

So you need to drag possible conspiracies into a debate about pride in coutry? Is that what this is?

The problem I've always had with the "we fought in Iraq because of the oil" thing is most of the US oil supply comes from Canada. Strangely we've not started a war with them...


Didn't those Southpark kids start one?

[honeykid]

I envy how Americans can show so much love for their country. I wish my countrymen would show some more patriotism...
Again, why? Also how do you want them to show it? Fly a flag? Have a special holiday? Stand up to Brussels. :D

To me, patriotism is a bit like religion, as in it's largely incomprehensible to me. Something that, without indoctrination, would almost never occur naturally and would be looked upon as odd when it did. I kind of understand pride in a nation's history and/or achievements, but patriotism seems to be much more than that.

Fiscal's in the military and comes from a military family, so it's understandable that he sees it as natural. I also understand why it's used, especially in the States. I can understand a 'little Englander' banging on about it, desperately trying to cling onto the past, the sad misguided fools. But a Belgian? Unless you want to go to war or start a political campaign, it's like wishing to be infected with smallpox or something, IMO.

I think will's list about France vs. the U. S. is from David Letterman's scripters.
Yep, that's what I figured.


That might work although I still like 'Jerusalem'.
Great poem, but it's both too religious and patriotic to represent modern Britain.


LOL! I wonder how many times Russell Crowe has been asked about exactly where in Australia he was born?
lol... So long as there weren't any telephones around, I'd be happy to ask him. :D

[Yoda]

Perhaps I can explain patriotism, then. I see it has having two components.

The first should be entirely understandable to anyone: you're proud of what your country has done and/or stands for. This type of patriotism is not innate; that is, it's not something you would feel just because you were born there, but because you also prefer what your country does and what it stands for compared to others. There should be nothing even remotely confusing about this aspect of patriotism.

The other type is more like the way you might feel about your childhood home. In fact, take all your questions about patriotism and replace "country" with "childhood home" and I suspect you'll see why they're rather strange questions. You don't have to think your childhood home was bigger, more solid constructed, more valuable, better kept, or a better place to live at the moment to have warm feelings for it. Mere familiarity with it--of both its good and bad traits--increases your affection for it, in the same way you can love even the faults of people you love.

Chesterton wrote about this in his book Orthodoxy. He says, among many other things (I'll have to grab a copy around here and re-read it soon, actually), that loving something that is only partially lovable is the only sensible response to it, anyway, because it is only by loving something that you would care enough to improve the parts of it that needed improving.

[wintertriangles]

Speak Welsh if you want to, but please be careful speaking French. A buddy of mine tried it, his throat constricted and he died.What the hell are you talking about?

[Oktober]

I can understand a 'little Englander' banging on about it, desperately trying to cling onto the past, the sad misguided fools.

I'd hardly refer to myself as a 'little Englander', I'm too much of a leftie for that LOL!

Great poem, but it's both too religious and patriotic to represent modern Britain.

I just like Parry's music to it. Blake was religious in a weird sense, & anyway 'Jerusalem' was originally an introduction to 'Milton a Poem'. I doubt whether it is canon that Jesus walked around Glastonbury a bit with his uncle. So I am not sure how religious it was really meant to be.

I like Elgar & people tell me that he was a jingoist, he wasn't, & originally had quite a humble background, although he was a bit of a self-publicist. Either way, the jingo image has stuck. Mind you, I like Echo & the Bunnymen as well. I'd give them a go at the national anthem.

lol... So long as there weren't any telephones around, I'd be happy to ask him. :D

You'd be OK if he only threw an iPhone at you I reckon.

[Oktober]

Perhaps I can explain patriotism, then. I see it has having two components.

Thank you, I was having difficulty with it. ;)

Chesterton wrote about this in his book Orthodoxy.

Chesterton, bah! Another fat Limey!

[will.15]

The Man Who Was Thursday is the biggest load of crap I ever read.

Some of those Father Brown stories are pretty good.

[Yoda]

Nyet. The Man Who Was Thursday is brilliant. Even if the ending is a little odd, everything that comes before it is positively masterful.

[Oktober]

Nyet. The Man Who Was Thursday is brilliant. Even if the ending is a little odd, everything that comes before it is positively masterful.

Pssst .... don't tell anyone, but I am a bit of a Chesterton fan, particularly some of his satirical poetry. Even if he was a Limey!

In fact, I have a beautiful 1936 anthology of three of the novellas, somewhere. I have so many books ...

[DexterRiley]

That guy is annoying.

Couldn't you post a right wing veteran who didn't have a whiny voice?

weird. He was called a left wing veteran when dubya was in office while now he's right wing because Obama is the main man.

Meanwhile his world view hasn't changed.

Here u go Willy one less whiny voice comen up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR4-LIEYgwc

[will.15]

The original guy was clearly a right winger libertarian type or maybe worse. Check out his opening comments bashing the Wall Street protestors and how he attacks Obama. There is no way he was ever called a left winger.

[Deadite]

Apparently you can't care about your country and take pride in it anymore.

[Fiscal]

"You can't say the same thing about the successes of my country, a lot of it is limited to my country alone. "

Which can also be said of many other countries. For instance, my country started the Industrial Revolution which eventually precipitated the electronic revolution, which enabled a Second World War GPO engineer called Tommy Flowers MBE, to construct the world's first electronic computer, leading inadvertently to the cyberspace world we have today. We were also the biggest & probably most brutal empire the world has ever seen. Was that empire a 'success' or not compared to creating the Industrial Revolution? I suppose it all depends on your point of view. Which was my point.

I just don't really see what your exact point actually was.

Again, I'm not interested in my country vs your country. Do you seriously not understand what I mean when I say that my country has accomplishments not duplicated by other countries? I'm not doubting that you can say the same thing about your country, and that is awesome that you can. I was defining why I am patriotic, and as it seems, we are both patriotic, so - what are you arguing exactly?

...which enabled a Second World War GPO engineer called Tommy Flowers MBE, to construct the world's first electronic computer, leading inadvertently to the cyberspace world we have today.

Al Gore was obviously the largest contributor to our cyberspace world :rolleyes:

+1 for the US

http://t.qkme.me/3565fi.jpg

[honeykid]

Speak Welsh if you want to, but please be careful speaking French. A buddy of mine tried it, his throat constricted and he died.
French is a gorgeous language, though it sounds better (to my ear, anyway) from those who live/grew up in the north of the country.

Perhaps I can explain patriotism, then. I see it has having two components.

The first should be entirely understandable to anyone: you're proud of what your country has done and/or stands for.
This I get. I even manage to feel this sometimes.... I think.

but because you also prefer what your country does and what it stands for compared to others.
This is where I run into problems.

There should be nothing even remotely confusing about this aspect of patriotism.
Sorry. I think I'm a lost cause. :)

The other type is more like the way you might feel about your childhood home. In fact, take all your questions about patriotism and replace "country" with "childhood home" and I suspect you'll see why they're rather strange questions. You don't have to think your childhood home was bigger, more solid constructed, more valuable, better kept, or a better place to live at the moment to have warm feelings for it. Mere familiarity with it--of both its good and bad traits--increases your affection for it, in the same way you can love even the faults of people you love.
I'm not with you here, either. That house is a house that I grew up in and no longer live at. It's a building. I have some good memories of things that happened there/happened while I lived there, but they're not 'the house's' memories, they're mine. This sounds a bit like an ex-pat, to me. Someone who now lives in another country and has a romanticized version/vision of the land they left. "Home". What you usually find is that, when you go back, it's not long before they're longing to leave for all the reasons they left in the first place. A bit like relationships.

Chesterton wrote about this in his book Orthodoxy. He says, among many other things (I'll have to grab a copy around here and re-read it soon, actually), that loving something that is only partially lovable is the only sensible response to it, anyway, because it is only by loving something that you would care enough to improve the parts of it that needed improving.
But if you don't care, then you can chuck it. Leave it to its own devices. It's probably not, but I've got battered woman syndrome running through my head when I read this. I can almost hear a woman crying "But I love 'im!"


I'd hardly refer to myself as a 'little Englander', I'm too much of a leftie for that LOL!
I wasn't refering to you with that comment. And, unless I'm mistaken, your username has been more than enough to indicate your political leanings. ;)

Dammit! I took so long trying (and mostly failing, I'm afraid) to put down what it is I meant about the above, that the whole thing has moved on.

There is no way he was ever called a left winger.
I've not watched either clip, but it sounds like he could easily be a 'left winger' and still criticise Obama. I don't understand the clamour over here for him as, were he a UK politicain, he'd have trouble finding a party right wing enough that would accept him.

Apparently you can't care about your country and take pride in it anymore.
I don't know if this was meant for anyone in particular, but I stated earlier that I see patriotism as something more than pride.


Al Gore was obviously the largest contributor to our cyberspace world :rolleyes:
+1 for the US
http://t.qkme.me/3565fi.jpg
I'm not getting this at all.

[Dog Star Man]

"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." - H.L. Mencken

[wintertriangles]

Damn he pulled out Mencken haha

[Yoda]

This I get. I even manage to feel this sometimes.... I think.
This is where I run into problems.
I'm not sure how it's possible to get one and not the other. Feeling proud about what your country has done almost necessitates comparing it to others. It wouldn't make a lot of sense to feel proud your country did something if absolutely every other country did it.

Sorry. I think I'm a lost cause. :)
That's never stopped me from trying. :)

I'm not with you here, either. That house is a house that I grew up in and no longer live at. It's a building. I have some good memories of things that happened there/happened while I lived there, but they're not 'the house's' memories, they're mine. This sounds a bit like an ex-pat, to me. Someone who now lives in another country and has a romanticized version/vision of the land they left. "Home". What you usually find is that, when you go back, it's not long before they're longing to leave for all the reasons they left in the first place. A bit like relationships.
It's not about who the memories "belong" to. It's not about ownership at all; it's about familiarity. It is natural and common to feel affection for things and people you're familiar with. For evidence of this, see almost every relationship, ever.

But look: my intent isn't to try to persuade you to feel this way. If you don't, you don't. I'm merely explaining why other people feel this way. I'm sure you've run into the feeling I'm describing many times in other people, so my analogy should make patriotism far less mysterious, even if you can't relate to it on a personal level for whatever reason.

But if you don't care, then you can chuck it. Leave it to its own devices. It's probably not, but I've got battered woman syndrome running through my head when I read this. I can almost hear a woman crying "But I love 'im!"
Yeah...definitely not what Chesterton was going for.

Sure, you can "chuck it." And then it doesn't get better. If you think countries can ever get better, and that it's good when they do, then you can see why patriotism is useful: because it is only the love of one's country by which the people within it can care enough to want to make it better.

[DexterRiley]

The original guy was clearly a right winger libertarian type or maybe worse. Check out his opening comments bashing the Wall Street protestors and how he attacks Obama. There is no way he was ever called a left winger.

Clearly

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8P62lvVJco

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y33OcGAw-1Y&feature=related

One place you won't see him is on Dancing with the Stars

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbP9ulzUgFo&feature=relmfu

^^^

thats pretty bizarre actually. And here i always thought Footloose had a ridiculous premise.

[honeykid]

I'm not sure how it's possible to get one and not the other. Feeling proud about what your country has done almost necessitates comparing it to others. It wouldn't make a lot of sense to feel proud your country did something if absolutely every other country did it.
I disagree and I think it's this comparing/competition that bothers me about so much about patriotism and why I don't engage with it. For example, I'm not proud that William Wilberforce was British or that Britain was the first nation to abolish slave trading. I'm just glad that Wilberforce existed and was able to accomplish it. If we're having a pissing contest (which is how patriotism often comes over to me) then I'd be bringing it up, but I'm not proud of Britain for it's part in it. I'm just glad it happened and sorry that it didn't happen sooner.


It's not about who the memories "belong" to. It's not about ownership at all; it's about familiarity. It is natural and common to feel affection for things and people you're familiar with. For evidence of this, see almost every relationship, ever.
Hey, if you're saying that patriotism is nothing more than affaction or familiarity, then I'm fine with that. But I've never heard anyone who was patriotic talk about it that way before. It's always so much deeper than that.

For example, I know you love your mother. I'm pretty sure you'd do anything you could for her, maybe including dying for her, whether she wanted you to or not. That's how I hear people talk about patriotism. Especially from the US. Now, I feel the same way about my mother. However, I know that she's not 'the best mother in the world'. I don't even know if there is a best mother in the world. But it always seem to me that patriots both feel that way and know it and it's the knowing that I don't understand.

But look: my intent isn't to try to persuade you to feel this way. If you don't, you don't. I'm merely explaining why other people feel this way.
Yep, I understand that and I appreciate the effort. :) I didn't mean to hijack the thread. I'm sure there's a patriotic thread somewhere.

I'm sure you've run into the feeling I'm describing many times in other people, so my analogy should make patriotism far less mysterious, even if you can't relate to it on a personal level for whatever reason.
I have, but only in bigots and old people. Sometimes, that's the same person. :D However, it makes sense in old people over here (and I really don't want to get into this subject, but I'm trying to explain myself) because they come from Empire and have an imperial way of thinking. That's the enviroment and country they grew up and were educated in. They were indoctrinated to believe that Britain was the greatest country in the world and it had the best of everything.

Sure, you can "chuck it." And then it doesn't get better. If you think countries can ever get better, and that it's good when they do, then you can see why patriotism is useful: because it is only the love of one's country by which the people within it can care enough to want to make it better.
Now, this has given me something I've grasped a little. As I said to Brodinski, unless you're going to war or into politics there's no need for patriotism. However, if patriots were defined as people who were actively improving or striving to improve the country, (and only those people. Not just voting or being a party member or doing 'the usual' such as paying taxes or going to work) then I think it could serve as a positive definition or purpose. Of course, it'd be argued what "making the country better" was and you'd have to ensure that being a patriot wasn't somehow better or, more importantly, not being a patriot wasn't something to be ashamed of. That way lies a totalitarian state.

*See, I've just struggled through that last paragraph and tried to make myself understood and yet, by the end of it, I'm thinking "Why aren't these people making their place better for themselves if they care so much? There's no 'need' to make 'the country' better. If each community improved itself the 'country' would improve anyway. Of course, that's the population which would feel the improvement and not the Government and Government, IMO, plays the largest part in patriotism as it's the only thing that needs it.*

[Oktober]

Again, I'm not interested in my country vs your country.

Neither am I. You've missed the point & you don't seem to realise that I don't recognise a bit of flagpole polishing when I see it.

Do you seriously not understand what I mean when I say that my country has accomplishments not duplicated by other countries?

I don't appear to be the one who isn't comprehending this. Well OK, as an example; you were the first to put humans on the moon. Of course, you had no help from anyone else & accomplished it all on your own.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun

I'm not doubting that you can say the same thing about your country, and that is awesome that you can. I was defining why I am patriotic, and as it seems, we are both patriotic, so - what are you arguing exactly?

I am not exactly flag-wavingly patriotic, I don't think so anyway. Although I may have inherited some of this attitude from my father who was in the Royal Artillery.

I'm not actually arguing anything. I have just pointed out that you are not the only country to have 'accomplishments' that no other country has. Unless you are going to tell me that the US is unique. I can think of a few other countries that can claim uniqueness. That's the trouble when you start to polish your own flagpole a bit too much, you start to believe the bollocks.

Al Gore was obviously the largest contributor to our cyberspace world :rolleyes:

+1 for the US

It would probably help if I knew exactly who Al Gore was. ;)

[will.15]

Nobod knows exactly who Al Gore is including Al Gore.

[Oktober]

Nobod knows exactly who Al Gore is including Al Gore.

I can recognise Tony (liar, liar, pants on fire) Blair the pork pie merchant & possible war criminal at about fifty paces.

Although, to be honest, you only have to listen for the porkies.

[Deadite]

I guess it's easier to dismiss patriotism as pointless and primitive when you've got a pretty decent country to take for granted.

[honeykid]

So if you come from a 'crappy country' patriotism makes more sense? Whilst I still don't get it, it does seem to be the case. Maybe patriotism is some national version of short man syndrome?

[Deadite]

No, I meant some people take it for granted when it's running relatively smooth. They don't truly appreciate how bad it could be, or the effort and sacrifice that went into creating a stable nation where they can afford to be indifferent.

[Deadite]

But then, I don't claim to know how it is where you're from. In my country though, it's mostly about respecting those who came before and what they did. We show we value what they've done for us by valuing the country they left in our hands. We aren't afraid to love our history as well as our potential, even though it wasn't perfect, and we care deeply about both, stupid as that may seem to you.

[Dog Star Man]

Voicing dissent over one's own nation, particularly ours since we have the first amendment, is perhaps the most patriotic thing anyone can ever do. The reason of patriotic dissent, in the American sense, is to control government. It is also why we have free press, to make the governments actions naked for all to see, and the second amendment. The purpose of the second amendment is to protect the first. Its not there just for one's own self protection, its there because of the probable notion that if the government expands out of control and thwarts individual liberty, people must take arms against it. This, if you read the constitution, is the purpose of being a good patriot. To take action against your government so that it never reaches that point the founders proposed in the second amendment. Dissent, what honeykid is doing, is the patriotic thing. The video of police using unnecessary force is dissent in the ever growing free press/media. I'm a dissenter of the American government, as the founders would have it, and that makes me a great patriot among all.

[will.15]

Voicing dissent over one's own nation, particularly ours since we have the first amendment, is perhaps the most patriotic thing anyone can ever do. The reason of patriotic dissent, in the American sense, is to control government. It is also why we have free press, to make the governments actions naked for all to see, and the second amendment. The purpose of the second amendment is to protect the first. Its not there just for one's own self protection, its there because of the probable notion that if the government expands out of control and thwarts individual liberty, people must take arms against it.
That is hogwash. The purpose of the second amendment is not so the people can take arms against their government. Where can you find that in the second amendment? What legal scholar says "because of the probable notion that if the government expands out of control and thwarts individual liberty, people must take arms against it?"

[Oktober]

Its not there just for one's own self protection, its there because of the probable notion that if the government expands out of control and thwarts individual liberty, people must take arms against it.

The US Constitution is an interesting document. Yeah, Farmer George had it coming! OK, he was madder than a hat factory full of mad hatters sniffing glue like there was no tomorrow, but it was bad enough back in the old country, what with people being arrested without trial, or arrested for stealing a loaf of bread when they were starving, or for owning a book, or drawing cartoons, or writing a book & then being sent to our equivalent of Guantanamo Bay or 'Australia' as we called it (Botany Bay?). I don't blame the Americans for not wanting to pay their taxes.

[Deadite]

Patriotic dissent is fine, but if your opinion is that patriotism is worthless, then you've immediately invalidated yourself.

AFAIK, the second amendment exists to act as an equalizer between federal and local. It might not work perfectly, but it's crucial to maintaining the republic.

And also so people can protect their family and property, of course. I suppose that was more important in a time when local law couldn't be depended on the same way they can now, though.

There are always gonna be bad cops. It's part of life. But it's a dumb reason to be anti-law enforcement in general.

[Yoda]

There's nothing inherently patriotic about dissent. You can dissent from your country's actions because you love it and think it can be better, or you can dissent for much more superficial reasons. It's no more inherently patriotic than speech itself. In both cases, whether or not it's patriotic depends on what you're saying and, especially, why you're saying it.

[Yoda]

I disagree and I think it's this comparing/competition that bothers me about so much about patriotism and why I don't engage with it. For example, I'm not proud that William Wilberforce was British or that Britain was the first nation to abolish slave trading. I'm just glad that Wilberforce existed and was able to accomplish it. If we're having a pissing contest (which is how patriotism often comes over to me) then I'd be bringing it up, but I'm not proud of Britain for it's part in it. I'm just glad it happened and sorry that it didn't happen sooner.
I'm not sure this is really possible. If you're proud that something happened and wish it had happened sooner, then by definition you must think less of countries for which it took even longer, yes? The moment you think of anything as either good or bad, you've already created the circumstance under which you can easily understand patriotism, because that standard of good or bad can be applied to your country, and it can stack up well in some ways and worse in others.

Hey, if you're saying that patriotism is nothing more than affaction or familiarity, then I'm fine with that. But I've never heard anyone who was patriotic talk about it that way before. It's always so much deeper than that.

For example, I know you love your mother. I'm pretty sure you'd do anything you could for her, maybe including dying for her, whether she wanted you to or not. That's how I hear people talk about patriotism. Especially from the US. Now, I feel the same way about my mother. However, I know that she's not 'the best mother in the world'. I don't even know if there is a best mother in the world. But it always seem to me that patriots both feel that way and know it and it's the knowing that I don't understand.
I'm not sure the way people talk about patriotism necessarily explains how they feel about it, or that expressions of patriotism are even intended to explain it in an emotional sense. They're just expressing it, not trying to win anyone over. Patriotism is certainly more than mere familiarity, I just think that's a helpful context in which to understand parts of it.

As for the "best mother in the world thing." I think the phrasing on these things throws people off: best mother in the world doesn't imply that she'd be the best mother if you simply transplanted her to some other family. She's the best mother in the world because she's your mother. And by that, I don't mean that people just think that because she happens to be there, I mean that by being there, she becomes a better mother to you, specifically.

It's just like the "I have the most wonderful wife in the world" thing. It's not that everyone would rather be married to my wife and I'm the only one who gets to be, it's that the mere act of being married to each other makes you a better fit over time because you know each other better than anyone else. So it's not an objective designation, but it's also not an illusion. At this very moment, the people who think they have the best wife in the world are right, in the sense that you probably couldn't find any other woman that would make them happier overall. It's a mix of things innate to the person, along with the accumulation of experience and knowledge of each other, that makes it both literally true and completely inapplicable to anyone else.

I think patriotism has the fervor it does because it can combine that level of affection and familiarity with the fact that, in many cases, the things someone loves about their country very often are applicable to other countries. That's a pretty potent combo.

Now, this has given me something I've grasped a little. As I said to Brodinski, unless you're going to war or into politics there's no need for patriotism. However, if patriots were defined as people who were actively improving or striving to improve the country, (and only those people. Not just voting or being a party member or doing 'the usual' such as paying taxes or going to work) then I think it could serve as a positive definition or purpose. Of course, it'd be argued what "making the country better" was and you'd have to ensure that being a patriot wasn't somehow better or, more importantly, not being a patriot wasn't something to be ashamed of. That way lies a totalitarian state.
I'm not sure I understand. It shouldn't be considered better to want to make your country better?

*See, I've just struggled through that last paragraph and tried to make myself understood and yet, by the end of it, I'm thinking "Why aren't these people making their place better for themselves if they care so much? There's no 'need' to make 'the country' better. If each community improved itself the 'country' would improve anyway. Of course, that's the population which would feel the improvement and not the Government and Government, IMO, plays the largest part in patriotism as it's the only thing that needs it.*
Yeah, there's a lot of confusing terminology here. "The country" doesn't necessarily mean "The government."

I disagree, anyway, that the patriotism exists for the benefit of the government. I think the vast majority of patriotic gestures are done for the people making those gestures. When you love something, such gestures are the natural result, and they provide a natural release for that affection. When I think of patriotic sacrifice, I don't think of its utility to the federal government. I think of the love that makes it possible and the ideas the sacrifice was made for.

Really, the whole thing makes a ton more sense if you replace the word "country" with "set of ideas" (not that all patriotism properly thinks of the notion of one's country in this way). Surely it isn't confusing or surprising that people would fight or die or feel pride in certain ideas and their propagation.

[Deadite]

I think part of the problem may be that some people are equating patriotism wholly with jingoism.

[Deadite]

And just for the record, I despised the Bush administration and his merry band of corporate thugs.

[Dog Star Man]

That is hogwash. The purpose of the second amendment is not so the people can take arms against their government. Where can you find that in the second amendment? What legal scholar says "because of the probable notion that if the government expands out of control and thwarts individual liberty, people must take arms against it?"

Right where it says, "...being necessary to the security of a free State..." I believe that's pretty clear.

[Dog Star Man]

There's nothing inherently patriotic about dissent. You can dissent from your country's actions because you love it and think it can be better, or you can dissent for much more superficial reasons. It's no more inherently patriotic than speech itself. In both cases, whether or not it's patriotic depends on what you're saying and, especially, why you're saying it.

This is true, context plays a huge part. If I didn't allude to that already, then I should have clarified.

[Deadite]

This is true, context plays a huge part. If I didn't allude to that already, then I should have clarified.

I assumed you meant patriotic dissent as opposed to plain dissent. :)

By the way, I dig your signature.

[Dog Star Man]

I assumed you meant patriotic dissent as opposed to plain dissent. :)

By the way, I dig your signature.

I'm talking about intellectual dissent, which is in my opinion an antecedent to the patriotic.

Thanks for the compliments on my signature. Love Brakhage.

[Deadite]

Now it's just a matter of time til someone posts saying the distinction is orwellian. :)

[Deadite]

I'm talking about intellectual dissent, which is in my opinion an antecedent to the patriotic.

I don't think either can be clearly delineated as primary or secondary.

[Deadite]

Maybe some people think patriotism is simply territorial? I suppose it could be perceived that way. If your country is (as Yoda put it) defined by a set of ideas, and patriotism defined as devotion to those ideas, then there is a territorial element naturally involved.

But it comes down to this: Either you care or you don't care. If you care, you will be protective and supportive of those ideas and you will judge the world according to those ideas.

[will.15]

Right where it says, "...being necessary to the security of a free State..." I believe that's pretty clear.
That is not referring to threats from within. Again, find me a legal scholar who interpets the second amendment that way. There isn't any.

[Deadite]

That is not referring to threats from within. Again, find me a legal scholar who interpets the second amendment that way. There isn't any.

It's impossible that it could refer to both, is it?

[will.15]

Anybody can call themselves a patriot and interpret their patriotism any way they want. Timothy McVeigh thought he was being a patriot when he blew up a federal building and killed a lot of people. In truth, he hated the United States and loved something that never existed. All sorts of neo Nazis say they are patriots, while being for everything that is against the principles of the constitution and would impose fascism if they could, which is hardly pro American the way the rest of us define it. If you hate the government (and I don't mean the party in power, but the entire structure of representative government and feel you no longer can accept the will of the people that shapes it), but love just the physical country, you are not a real patriot. To just love the physical land is not what being an American is about. And Dog Star's patriotism is a load of crap. As long as the United States has representative government and free elections, no one has the right to overthrow it through force. I am going to trust a libertarian or anyone else to tell me when the government is too powerful and it is time for an armed insurrection? He should stick to his movie theorems only he understands.

[will.15]

It's impossible that it could refer to both, is it?
It could, but has never been interpreted that way and the entire language in context does not support that interpretation.

[Deadite]

It could, but has never been interpreted that way and the entire language in context does not support that interpretation.

So what do you think it is saying exactly? That the United States government is giving itself permission to have a military?

[Deadite]

And Dog Star's patriotism is a load of crap.

:eek:

I actually agree with most of your post but you snuck this in there...

[will.15]

:eek:

I actually agree with most of your post but you snuck this in there...
He is implying individuals are arbiters of when the federal government is oppressive and the second amendment justifies rebellion even when we still have representative government. Does Dog Star Man think armed rebellion would be okay against the existing government? WE ALL AGREE IF A DICTATORSHIP TOOK OVER THE UNITED STATES, SAY BY THE MILITARY, PEOPLE CAN REBEL AGAINST IT THROUGH FORCE. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID. I THINK I WAS HEARING A HOSTILITY AGAINST THE UNITED STATES THAT GOES PRETTY DEEP BEYOND GOING TO THE BALLOT BOX TO CHANGE THINGS.

Hit cap locks again by mistake. I have to look at the keyboard when I type or I would even make more typos than I do.

[Deadite]

He is implying individuals are arbiters of when the federal government is oppressive and the second amendment justifies rebellion even when we still have representative government. Does Dog Star Man think armed rebellion would be okay against the existing government? WE ALL AGREE IF A DICTATORSHIP TOOK OVER THE UNITED STATES, SAY BY THE MILITARY, PEOPLE CAN REBEL AGAINST IT THROUGH FORCE. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID. I THINK I WAS HEARING A HOSTILITY AGAINST THE UNITED STATES THAT GOES PRETTY DEEP BEYOND GOING TO THE BALLOT BOX TO CHANGE THINGS.

Hit cap locks again by mistake. I have to look at the keyboard when I type or I would even make more typos than I do.

Who else would be the arbiter, then? The federal government?

[Dog Star Man]

That is not referring to threats from within. Again, find me a legal scholar who interpets the second amendment that way. There isn't any.

http://www.guncite.com/journals/reycrit.html

Standard Model scholars note that these statements were echoed by similar sentiments from other Framers, all of whom seem to have been proponents of the individual ownership of firearms. Thomas Jefferson was a vigorous advocate of gun ownership because he believed that it fostered both personal and societal virtue;[32] a model constitution that he drafted for (p.469)Virginia in 1776 included a provision guaranteeing that "[n]o Freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands]."[33] Similarly, Anti-Federalist Patrick Henry agreed, stating that "The great object is that every man be armed.... Every one who is able may have a gun."[34] Thus, the right to keep and bear arms was considered an essential form of protection not just for home and hearth, but also against government tyranny. It can be understood as yet another of the forms of division of power that the Framers created to protect citizens' liberties. It is commonplace to note that the Framers divided power within the federal government, by apportioning it among three branches, and that the Framers divided government power in general by splitting it between the federal government and the governments of the states. But under the Standard Model approach it is fair to say that the Framers divided power yet another way, by ensuring that the citizenry possessed sufficient military power to offset that of the Federal government. Such a division makes sense in light of such other (p.470)Constitutional language as the Preamble's statement that the authority of the government comes from the people, and the similar statement in the Tenth Amendment.[35] If the federal and state governments are merely agents of the people, it is logical that the people would be reluctant to surrender a monopoly on military power to their servants, for fear that their servants might someday become their masters.[36]
This was certainly the view of commentators throughout the nineteenth century. As Justice Joseph Story wrote in his Commentaries on the Constitution:

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic, since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.[37]

On the contrary, I'll raise you this source for a few others. But I'll doubt you'll read them, and knowing you, you'll say I'm making this stuff up. Blahdy, blahdy, blah. I've argued with you in the past and it's like having a debate with a stone wall.

[Dog Star Man]

He is implying individuals are arbiters of when the federal government is oppressive and the second amendment justifies rebellion even when we still have representative government. Does Dog Star Man think armed rebellion would be okay against the existing government? WE ALL AGREE IF A DICTATORSHIP TOOK OVER THE UNITED STATES, SAY BY THE MILITARY, PEOPLE CAN REBEL AGAINST IT THROUGH FORCE. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID. I THINK I WAS HEARING A HOSTILITY AGAINST THE UNITED STATES THAT GOES PRETTY DEEP BEYOND GOING TO THE BALLOT BOX TO CHANGE THINGS.

Hit cap locks again by mistake. I have to look at the keyboard when I type or I would even make more typos than I do.

A fool talks in caps lock, a bigger fool puts words in people's mouths an presumes them to be true. I'm not saying an armed rebellion is necessary for the time being since we live by virtue of democracy, and the only oppressors seem to be our own "tyranny of the majority". I will say however that if the government becomes a dictatorship, one of Mao, Hitler, and Stalin, all of whom worked to disarm their public, yes the people should rise against the oppressor to secure a free state as the founders had intended.

[will.15]

What Patrick Henry thought is meaningless because he didn't support the Constitution. He preferred the previous far weaker goverment which was a failure. And the Jefferson quote is pretty vague. Where is the support in the Second Amendment for armed rebellion against a democratically elected government? That is what you are saying is pemissable, aren't you?

[Dog Star Man]

What Patrick Henry thought is meaningless because he didn't support the Constitution. He preferred the previous far weaker goverment which was a failure. And the Jefferson quote is pretty vague. Where is the support in the Second Amendment for armed rebellion against a democratically elected government? That is what you are saying is pemissable, aren't you?

Thus, the right to keep and bear arms was considered an essential form of protection not just for home and hearth, but also against government tyranny.

Why am I not surprised you didn't read the quote I quoted? You should be reading the link since it goes into more detail than I ever could give you. I'm giving you the nuts and bolts. But this is unsurprising nonetheless.

[will.15]

A fool talks in caps lock, a bigger fool puts words in people's mouths an presumes them to be true. I'm not saying an armed rebellion is necessary for the time being since we live by virtue of democracy, and the only oppressors seem to be our own "tyranny of the majority". I will say however that if the government becomes a dictatorship, one of Mao, Hitler, and Stalin, all of whom worked to disarm their public, yes the people should rise against the oppressor to secure a free state as the founders had intended.
I cap locked by mistake and didn't want to retype and said so, so your fool comment is ridiculous like many of your other opinions. Now you have clarified what you meant, but the meaning was pretty vague before because many haters of the American government have said the same thing you said previously to support rebelling against the government now. If you don't want to be misunderstood, you have to be more precise to separate yourself from militia group leaders who have said the same thing about opposing the existing government.

[Deadite]

I think it would be astonishingly neglectful if the founders hadn't considered the possibilty of tyranny important, considering, ya know, their situation.

[Dog Star Man]

It seems I'm doomed to lack of clarification, forgive me, I'll work on it. Will you work on reading source material now?

[Deadite]

It seems I'm doomed to lack of clarification, forgive me, I'll work on it. Will you work on reading source material now?

What do you mean by that? You want we should overthrow the gubbermint together? Say, this weekend? :p

[Dog Star Man]

What do you mean by that? You want we should overthrow the gubbermint together? Say, this weekend? :p

It seems I'm doomed to lack of clarification: meaning I lack clarity at times.

forgive me: to ask patience as I...

I'll work on it: work towards clarity.

Will you work: work towards a concept of...

on reading source material now?: learning about knowledge and stuffs, it can be a cool story bro!

[will.15]

From Wikipedia:

The ideologies of various Militia movements can be described as political, constitutional, conspiratorial, or community based. Militia groups claim legitimacy based on colonial writings, particularly the Declaration of Independence (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence); Article 1, section 8 (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Militia_Clause) and the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/United_States_Constitution); the Militia Act of 1792 (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1792); Title 10 (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Title_10_of_the_United_States_Code), Section 311 (http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t09t12+170+0++%28%29%20%20AND%20%28%2810%29%20ADJ%20USC%29%3ACITE%20AND%2 0%28USC%20w%2F10%20%28311%29%29%3ACITE%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20) of the United States Code (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/United_States_Code); and the concept of an independent wing of the citizenry that enacts its own governmental beliefs.[8] (http://www.movieforums.com/community/#cite_note-MILITIA-7) Watchdog groups, such as the Anti-Defamation League (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Anti-Defamation_League) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center) have portrayed militias as racist, though only some militias have white supremacist ideologies. (For example, The Gadsden Alabama Minutemen who exposed the racist "Good'O'Boys Roundup" held by ATF agent Eugene Rightmyer had black members.) Robert Churchill sees a white supremacist "resistance wing" of the movement and a radical libertarian "constitutionalist wing" motivated by various, at times over lapping, concerns.[7] (http://www.movieforums.com/community/#cite_note-ARMING-6) The beliefs of the latter group center around opposition to the power of federal or local governments and limitations imposed by governing parties or erosions of liberties by governing parties.[19] (http://www.movieforums.com/community/#cite_note-18) Some Militias are also formed in order to protect a community from outside intervention or perceived negative influence by outside parties. Some Militias have also formed around a particular ideology without all members agreeing on every particular issue. Power struggles, politics, and disagreements persist as in any organization; hence internal ideologies can change from time to time.
Some of the movement sees power of a government as a form of tyranny.[3] (http://www.movieforums.com/community/#cite_note-CAMO-2) Their beliefs focus on limited-government, on taxes, regulations, and gun control efforts as perceived threats to constitutional liberties. Many of their views are similar to those of the John Birch Society (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/John_Birch_Society), tax protester movement, county supremacy movement, state sovereignty movement, and the states’ rights movement.[4] (http://www.movieforums.com/community/#cite_note-RIGHT-3) Gun control is considered unconstitutional, and a move toward fascism by the government. The controversial novel Unintended Consequences (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Unintended_Consequences_(novel)) by John Ross (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/John_Ross_(author)) in 1996 is an example of these beliefs. However, not all Militias are armed, or support the use of violence in political change.
The ideologies most commonly associated with the militia movement are the Christian Patriot movement (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Christian_Patriot_movement), the Constitutional militia movement (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/Constitutional_militia_movement), and opposition to the creation of a one world government (http://www.movieforums.com/wiki/New_World_Order_(conspiracy_theory)). Most militias are derived from a local populace who come to common belief, and so ideologies tend to differ by region. Most agree upon local regulation opposed to global, federal or state regulation

[Dog Star Man]

1. Why are you quoting wikipedia of all things? If this was a term paper I'd give you an F.

2. What exactly are you stating here? That militias are racist? That we need gun control? That this is somehow, (can't make heads or tails of this notion in here), but it proves that the second amendment isn't what its stated for?

Talk about clarification issues...

[Deadite]

:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie71MR-S7Ow

[will.15]

1. Why are you quoting wikipedia of all things? If this was a term paper I'd give you an F.

2. What exactly are you stating here? That militias are racist? That we need gun control? That this is somehow, (can't make heads or tails of this notion in here), but it proves that the second amendment isn't what its stated for?

Talk about clarification issues...
The article said not all militias are racist, but the noteworthy part is they have the same interpretation of the Second Amendment that you have, which is not a mainstream view, and many advocate violent overthrow of the government. Some militias are not racist, but have extreme libertarian views. It is all there in the quote.

[Deadite]

So you are trying to lump people together and insinuate superiority in your interpretation by negative association?

[will.15]

He keeps wanting us to read something that is esentially right wing fodder for the militia nuts.

[Deadite]

Oic.

[Dog Star Man]

The article said not all militias are racist, but the noteworthy part is they have the same interpretation of the Second Amendment that you have, which is not a mainstream view, and many advocate violent overthrow of the government. Some militias are not racist, but have extreme libertarian views. It is all there in the quote.

Define "mainstream" for me will you? One that is acceptable to the modern world? IE. gun control, "shall not be infringed." Or the one that is factually correct. IE. the link I provided for which you did not read.

[Oktober]

Define "mainstream" for me will you?

People who watch Freeview? ;)

[DexterRiley]

Maybe some people think patriotism is simply territorial? I suppose it could be perceived that way. If your country is (as Yoda put it) defined by a set of ideas, and patriotism defined as devotion to those ideas, then there is a territorial element naturally involved.

But it comes down to this: Either you care or you don't care. If you care, you will be protective and supportive of those ideas and you will judge the world according to those ideas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZCPjXcCj9k

:laugh:

[will.15]

Define "mainstream" for me will you? One that is acceptable to the modern world? IE. gun control, "shall not be infringed." Or the one that is factually correct. IE. the link I provided for which you did not read.
You quote Patrick Henry, I'll cite Hamilton:

http://www.progressivetheology.org/essays/2008.03.20-Second-Amendment.html


As for Patrick Henry, not only was he opposed to the ratification of the Constitution, unlike some of the other famous figures opposed, he never accepted it. So his opinion means nothing with regard to how to look at the Second Amendment. He wasn't even talking about the Second Amendment in your quote. And even Jefferson's views are suspect since he also resisted it when he saw it, but later changed his mind. He was in France at the time and had nothing to do with the shaping of it. His narrow view, however, accepted by conservatives today, was not universally accepted at the time. There has always been differing interpretation of the language in the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalism


Oh, and your link is not fact, just some interpretation as is what I linked, and I didn't see anything cited to show the author was a legal scholar. And by legal scholar I meant a noted legal scholar, not just some NRA guy.

[honeykid]

+ rep for Dex. A friend of mine is obssessed with Hetalia. I was actually thinking of suggesting that some of those in this thread watch it. I think some of you would like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetalia:_Axis_Powers

She cosplayed as Germany this summer. :D

[DexterRiley]

I also understand why it's used, especially in the States. I can understand a 'little Englander' banging on about it, desperately trying to cling onto the past, the sad misguided fools.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQAWSXPaOCc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUO28XfORgM

:D

[Oktober]

It is a fair bet that Malory's Le Morte Darthur (first published in 1485) was influenced by Breton & Welsh Celtic myths of a Romano-Celtic warrior chieftain who lived through the collapse of the Holy Roman Western Empire in the fifth century & may have fought against the invading, predominantly Frisian tribes, who had been displaced by the Huns inter alios on the Continent. Eventually the country they settled itself was named after one of the tribes (Angles). The name 'Arthur' may be a Gaelic play on the word for bear.

Robin Hood & Maid Marion are possibly references to pre-Christian Germanic (Anglo-Saxon) belief systems & may have originally represented tutelary forest deities.

Both of these examples could be viewed as a sort of reverse euhemerisation when you take into account that 'Artor' was a known Celtic solar deity principally revered by the Belge.

As for tea being Indian; the Indians themselves didn't drink it except as a purgative medicine. The Chinese originated tea drinking as we know it.

Sorry for being a bit off-topic ...

[Yoda]

Man, Will really loves the argument from authority. To a get-married-and-have-little-fallacy-babies-with-it degree.

[Dog Star Man]

I'm going to pull a Will and not read any source material from wikipedia pages since they aren't of legal authority and written by anonymous readers, (which they are). Ba-dum-tshh.

Now, getting back on topic which had nothing to do with the second ammendment, ashamed of being American... yeah, how about that...

[will.15]

First of all I did read it and those wikipedia entries are sourced.

Turns out I was wrong about Patrick Henry. He was a flip-flopper worse than Romney. He turned into a big government guy after being scared by the French Revolution and joined the Federalist Party His views at that point were no longer consistent with earlier comments about armed rebellion against democratic government. He was never a fan of Thomas Jefferson, to the left of him when younger and to the right older. Quoting our Founding Fathers is always a precarious business. Jefferson also was very inconsistent, as President he did many things he had earlier insisted the federal government couldn't do. He expanded the federal government's power, which he always warned against.

[DexterRiley]

Is there a politician alive that could be considered as a non flip flopper?

thats such a silly tag to saddle any of em with. They all do it

except for maybe Tony Benn. that delightful old bugger never wavers.

which is awesome.

[Dog Star Man]

The nature of making fun of you is easy, "I want legal and legit sources for my information!... now excuse me while I source wikipedia..." See a double-standard here? If something conflicts with your political world view, its entirely acceptable to disregard legal and legit source material you ask me to provide but for the non-legal and non-legit source material you provide. Go blow smoke. This conversation between us is over.

[will.15]

My sources were legit, wikipedia citations were from legitimate legal scholar sources. Yours were what? Patrick Henry making comments he would later repudiate and was never referring to the Second Amendment.

[Deadite]

Anyways, It's as dumb to be ashamed of being American because of some A-holes abusing authority as it would be to stereotype all cops as bad because of it.

That kind of stuff doesn't really represent America. It just happens, and it happens in every country. It sometimes seems to me like some people look for excuses to badmouth America, and lump all its people in with a few jerks,

So, no, I'm not ashamed. Those kinds of jerks and their behavior aren't the norm.

[Gabrielle947]

I'm from Europe but I used to idolize USA.I live in a small country and in a small city,where everyone knows each other so I always thought that in America I could meet more interesting people,do more various activities,realize myself more.Also I live in a post-soviet country,so people still have this soviet attitude(hard to explain it) and America looked like a open and free country.But people(friends or just random rumors) who visited USA said that America is a bad country and people living there are rude,stupid and fat(no offense).And I keep hearing this more and more.Still,I think of America as a land of opportunities and I will visit it sometime,but I'm afraid that I might be disappointed. :/ So I was wondering,if Americans like their country?

[wintertriangles]

So I was wondering,if Americans like their country?Not to speak for everyone but I gather that the general opinion is that the idea of America is what people like but the people in it are what people don't like. That covers a lot of bases I think.

[will.15]

America is a big country. People in big cities like New York tend to be rude and fat, People in smaller places are more friendly and fat. Americans eat well.

[Gabrielle947]

general opinion is that the idea of America is what people like but the people in it are what people don't like. That covers a lot of bases I think.
yes,but people represent the country.I don't think that someone would like to live in a first world country with great economy,good opportunities,beautiful landscape but very rude people.
I also agree that it's a big country so more rude people live there.Also they are kind of spoiled in America due to historical issues(they didn't have to face directly WW1 and 2,Soviet Union during Cold War etc.),maybe that's why Europeans tend to see Americans sleazy.
I guess I can only know meeting them myself. ^^

[will.15]

The French have a reputation for being much ruder and arrogant than Americans.

I don't know about Lithuanians, but Russians don't have a great reputation for friendliness. Many consider them to be pushy and dishonest.

[Gabrielle947]

not sure about French,but Russians are considered to be rude.There are lots of them in Lithuania and they never learn lithuanian.Tourists from other countries come just to rest in my city for summer and they still know some basic local words and Russians live in there for like 20 years and keep speaking Russian. :/ well can't blame them,~80 years of Soviet Union did it's job.

[Nausicaä]

^ If you think Americans are rude, go live in London, these rude Americans will seem uber friendly after London... I've never had problems with Americans - seemed friendly everywhere I've been in America, including New York. But like most countries, you have lovely people and then you have the rude arses.

I've also never had a problem with the French and rudeness, but the 'rudeness' seems to be directed at English speaking people who just assume the French don't mind talking in English to them, a lot don't like that an English speaker, who is in France, doesn't bother first to speak in their language/or at least try, and that's fair enough in my eyes.

I love the French, they can be a bit standoffish at first, but once you get talking, they are fine and dandy.

[cinemaafficionado]

I'm from Europe but I used to idolize USA.I live in a small country and in a small city,where everyone knows each other so I always thought that in America I could meet more interesting people,do more various activities,realize myself more.Also I live in a post-soviet country,so people still have this soviet attitude(hard to explain it) and America looked like a open and free country.But people(friends or just random rumors) who visited USA said that America is a bad country and people living there are rude,stupid and fat(no offense).And I keep hearing this more and more.Still,I think of America as a land of opportunities and I will visit it sometime,but I'm afraid that I might be disappointed. :/ So I was wondering,if Americans like their country?

I don't think that any one can lable any culture rude. Most Americans love this country as they know it's the land of opportunity and that they have more individual freedom here than anywhere else on earth. Because of it's diversity, it's probably also the easiest country to assimilate in as a foreigner, if you try.
I think the French are just mostly jealous of the US and have a hard time accepting the fact that they are not the super power they once were, when they still had their colonies.
I speak French but when I was in Paris, I often asked for directions in English, just to see the response. I was put off by quite a few French pretending that they didn't speak English, especially when they had me pegged for an American. They were surprised and instantly friendlier when I addressed them in French. I know of other Americans that have had the same experience. The French are so quick to forget that we liberated Paris for them but then again, a lot of the French were rooting for the Nazis.
It's ironic, but today's Germans are a lot friendlier to Americans than the French ever were.

[cinemaafficionado]

^ If you think Americans are rude, go live in London, these rude Americans will seem uber friendly after London... I've never had problems with Americans - seemed friendly everywhere I've been in America, including New York. But like most countries, you have lovely people and then you have the rude arses.

I've also never had a problem with the French and rudeness, but the 'rudeness' seems to be directed at English speaking people who just assume the French don't mind talking in English to them, a lot don't like that an English speaker, who is in France, doesn't bother first to speak in their language/or at least try, and that's fair enough in my eyes.

I love the French, they can be a bit standoffish at first, but once you get talking, they are fine and dandy.

I lived in London for a while (Belgravia) and had a good time with Brits.
I think some of the rudeness is directed at certain segments of immigrants that some native Londoners were fed up with. I would guesstimate that the Brits in the center of London are definitely a minority now.
When I went to East London I had a problem understanding Cokney but they were still friendly towards me.
England has remained one of America's staunchest allies and the same goes with most British people. I think we have similiar overall interests and are opposed to the same things.

[Nausicaä]

London - it's every walk of life that's rude, but mostly the 'business'/Yuppie types that are rude to everyone I've noticed - not just rude to immigrants. Never had a problem with cockneys, love the cockney accent.


the Brits in the center of London are definitely a minority now


Still a majority by miles and miles in London overall, but yes, definitely more in the centre of London compared to British born. As it spreads out across London it gets more British born. As with most cities here in Britain.

[cinemaafficionado]

[quote=Nausicaä;796251]London - it's every walk of life that's rude, but mostly the 'business'/Yuppie types that are rude to everyone I've noticed - not just rude to immigrants. Never had a problem with cockneys, love the cockney accent. ]

You are British, so you probably understand the cockney accent. For us Americans, it's like another language, especially when they speak fast and use slang.