NationStates Jolt Archive

here is something that would be really interesting to me and that is what do people think of the English?
i know this was done the other day with what people thought about the canadians and i apologise for copying but i am really intrigued to see what people have to say about us english folk, we are a small country but we do so like to be noticed.
so any comments at all would be appreciated
have a lovely day
xxx

*in before the lock*
Coughflamingtargetcough.

we are a small country but we do so like to be noticed.

we do?

personally, i don't care and when it comes to arguments, i find most english people on the internet that i have met are actually patriotic after being aggrevated... to prove a point usually.

yeah - i wouldn't really like this to turn in to a flame post... but i think it will do after that. O.o

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?

Sorry ... that's what came to mind ...

Anyway, what do I think about the English?

Short answer: I don't.

Long answer: Send me a plane ticket and I'll come check ya'll out in person.

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?

you may want to elaborate on that since as it stands it is rather vague... wouldn't want to come across as a rather foolish and idiotic person now, would you? O.o

The English: The most energetic, innovative, and entreprenurial nation since the Romans. Too civilized to maintain an Empire. I have mad respect for the English and what they accomplished. I think right now though, y'all are in a state of decline. Why? You lack strong leadership, or perhaps your time is simply passed.

you may want to elaborate on that since as it stands it is rather vague... wouldn't want to come across as a rather foolish and idiotic person now, would you? O.o


It's a line from the song "Why Can't The English?" in My Fair Lady (adapted from Shaw's "Pygmalion").

Henry Higgins:

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?
This verbal class distinction by now should be antique.
If you spoke as she does, sir, Instead of the way you do,
Why, you might be selling flowers, too.
An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other
Englishman despise him.
One common language I'm afraid we'll never get.
Oh, why can't the English learn to set
A good example to people whose
English is painful to your ears?
The Scotch and the Irish leave you close to tears.
There even are places where English completely
disappears. In America, they haven't used it for years!
Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?

I hope your not lumping Scottish people in with the "English" tag?

I hope your not lumping Scottish people in with the "English" tag?

if i wanted to include the Scottish with this i would have asked what people think of the british?

I like british! They drink lots of beeer, and they are soooo cute when they get sunburnt (They must be all masochistic).
British Humor is the best, also.

Downsides... well, besides most of them arent fanaticaly Pro-European.. (shoot me) ...the british weather. But that isnt their fault :)

if i wanted to include the Scottish with this i would have asked what people think of the british?

I only ask because I met an American tourist during the (brief) summer here and he asked me "What's it like living in Scatland England?", many Americans still think England *is* Britain :P

I just wanted to make the distinction to those who did think you meant Britain as whole. We Scots might like many English people as friends, I have loads of them, but some of us hate England the country and it's Government, they imposed the fated Poll tax on us and seem to think that everyone north of the border still live in caves! (When truth be told only some of us still live in caves)

England is the greatest country in the world EVER. I'm not biased or anything.

It's a line from the song "Why Can't The English?" in My Fair Lady (adapted from Shaw's "Pygmalion").

Henry Higgins:

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?
This verbal class distinction by now should be antique.
If you spoke as she does, sir, Instead of the way you do,
Why, you might be selling flowers, too.
An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other
Englishman despise him.
One common language I'm afraid we'll never get.
Oh, why can't the English learn to set
A good example to people whose
English is painful to your ears?
The Scotch and the Irish leave you close to tears.
There even are places where English completely
disappears. In America, they haven't used it for years!
Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?

lmao - my bad. very sorry. i thought you were starting off the bitch fest... and i was like 'eh? that's a new one.' but i have to admit... reading that, it's absolutely true.

The English: The most energetic, innovative, and entreprenurial nation since the Romans. Too civilized to maintain an Empire. I have mad respect for the English and what they accomplished. I think right now though, y'all are in a state of decline. Why? You lack strong leadership, or perhaps your time is simply passed.

I wouldn't say 'passed'. But we haven't got any aggression in our culture now to viciously compete for the top spot. I mean, really... if you were to think of the UK as a whole, it's not like we're doing badly. I'm happy how things are and I believe that the world is mine to take with the options I have. I don't come from a rich background so while we haven't got the weather, we have some mighty fine comedy and a good education system (if people are willing to exploit it). Isn't that all that matters? Well, for me it is :P

lmao - my bad. very sorry. i thought you were starting off the bitch fest... and i was like 'eh? that's a new one.' but i have to admit... reading that, it's absolutely true.


'Tis one of my favorite musicals.

If I wanted to start the bitch fest, I'd have said something about the food. It's either completely bland grease or grease with 50 pounds of curry piled on top of it. ;)

Now where's my plane ticket ... I have to come teach the English how to use spices properly. :D

hate England the country and it's Government,

Hey, even the English hate the English government!

I dont think its right to discuss the English or England without talking about the rest of the island/islands. All the great things that England has done, the Empire, victory in the Great War and standing up to Hitler in the Second World War was done with our 'British Brothers,' the welsh, scottish and irish. In fact the Empire, especially in South Africa, was built by many, many Scottish people rather than English. Everything we done was in the name of Britain, not England, expect the Spanish Armada and all the medievil wars before that. For the past 400 or so years there has been no English state, only a British one, and long may it carry on like that! Iv'e always said im British rather than English, most likely because of my Irish background, but there are very few in England who have true English Blood becuase of the Empire and the unification of Britain we have all mixed together. In my experience, that the best and nicest people in England are those who say they are British, the English who are ignorant of their Britishood are usaully quite common, St Geogre Flag waving, beer drinking, badley dressed and rude yobs, who only support there nation (as England is not a country) at Football, given half the chance they would move to Spain and completetly forget their green Motherland, who is without a dount the Greatest Country on Earth, even if it is no longer the most powerful...we are no called Great Britain for nothing!!!

Before I respond, I want to preface my observation. As an American, I know that a lot of other nations think that we are obsessed with personal hygiene. Most of us do shower and shampoo at least once a day, we brush our teeth when we first get up, after every meal, and before going to bed, we gargle mouthwashes composed of something like battery acid, we ladies shave all visible body hair, we layer lotions and top it all off with perfume, and we are obsessed with our fingernails and toenails. Plastic surgery is more common than necessary surgery, and when a child is born the parents start saving for the orthodontist and braces. OK, I know we are a little batty on this whole thing. With this in mind, please understand no offense meant when I ask, what is with your teeth? :confused:

I think you will find that there is nothing wrong on the whole with English teeth. All medical work like orthodontist skills and braces are free (unless you have the money and want to do to a private Orthodontist). I think its just a stereotype that American TV always bring up like on Family Guy or the Simpsons. If i beleived everything i saw on AMerican TV shows, and we have all of them over here. I could easily ask why are all Americans so Fat? And i dont think its true that other nations think you are obsessed with personal hygiene, when i think of Americans i think of Fat ignorant bigots, at least in the South anyway. But i know on the whole thats not true.

Hey, even the English hate the English government!
Always have done. Always will do. It's bleedin' tradition, innit? Quite right too, mate!

I've been to England more than once, and I know plenty of people from there (who left said country), and I've never been all that impressed. The food is awful, with almost every waiter/waitress coming from a foreign country, even in small towns! The cities are dank, dark, and sooty (especially London, where staying a week gets you pulling soot literally out of your ears if you clean them) to a degree that you would imagine you were in Eastern Europe, not the modern West. However, the worst part of England is the culture of its youths. The adults I've had very little to no problem with. Sure you have the occasional "Can't Break Away From the Past" guy, who still thinks that England is the greatest superpower the world has to offer, but for the most part, the adult population recognizes that England's time has long since past, and its position as a single small island cannot truly afford superpower status.

The youth on the other hand...well they combine the worst aspects of American punks with redneck ignorance. Have you ever gotten into an argument with a Euro-trash wearing, mohawk headed, idiot about the fact that England is not in fact the savior of every problem the world has? I have. Worse yet, the youth fails to recognize any of England's past that isn't glorious. The botched situations left behind in India and Pakistan, Israel and Palestine, you name it...they completely ignore that, whilest still believing the Empire should return to its former glory. I don't know what the problem is with the English educational system, all I know is that they need a taste of reality.

England as a nation come across as arrogant and narrow minded, gloating in victory and in a mood in defeat, still hung up on Germany and the wars and with an attitude on our european neighbours bordering on rascism. I mean this as a generalisation, many are in no way like this, but its there in the media so is therefore projected as an identity.
I think the English are the only race in Britain that clings to the idea of being British, anyone from Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland will tell you thats were they are from and will defend their national identity. Ive always seen the idea of Britain as making up for the lack of tradition etc in Englands history compared to the other nations of the UK, think of Scotland and you think of Castles, tartan etc etc Britain people think of the empire, of the Queen etc England doesnt really conjure up such images...
Sooner Scotland breaks away the better!

I wouldnt criticise the English education system, its still better than that of the US.
Id imagine overall their teeth are better as since everyone can get them done on the NHS, not just those with enough money like in the States... just a thought.

The English: The most energetic, innovative, and entreprenurial nation since the Romans. Too civilized to maintain an Empire. I have mad respect for the English and what they accomplished. I think right now though, y'all are in a state of decline. Why? You lack strong leadership, or perhaps your time is simply passed.
I just burned myself with hot coffee out of shock!
Someone here hasn't been reading there history books very well, the English were one of the more imperialistic powers that the world new. Now, if you's have said "too weak to hold onto an empire" than you'd have been on the money. The English, like most monarchies, had a tradition of seizing power, and then screwing themselves out of it. Fortunately, the English had the dual advantages of being far enough away from those parts of their empire in rebellion and begin level headed enough to not rip the entire country apart out of spite against their crazier rulers.

lmao - Tremalkier - if that's what someone has to say about British people, I dread to think what is said about Americans. I have to say... what you have 'assumed' to be what British people think... as you have stated it as fact... it's truly absurd. Are you sure it WAS England you went to? Maybe you meant East Germany... they both start with 'E', after all ;)

As a 16 year old english person... I also find your comment on the youth very offensive. Most English youths were never born into an age where Britain was actually a dominant force... and we accept that America believes it is the only nation who has the right to boss people around, just like the police. :)

And I believe you are missing out a very crucial point... American children are taught the very same things - it's all glory and nothing else. I'll think you'll find that if you in fact had a clue about anything in English history, you would know that for several hundred years we were raped by pretty much any group of people who wanted to invade us. At GCSE standard, I was taught very little about English history other than occurences in Northern Ireland and WW2 and it's influences at the start of the 'Cold War'. I was actually taught modern American history predominantly... so I learnt about all your failures instead. Cute huh? I have yet to see a syllabus that teaches about Israel or Palistine but I know my Exam board had questions on British influence in India (that would have included failures, believe it or not).

So. Shhhhh. :)

Sooner Scotland breaks away the better!

Good, and you can stop taking southerners' money while you're at it :)

The above said, my opinion of the English would be signifigantly better if they had had the sense that every other country had when undergoing the change from momarchy to democracy and eliminated/exiled the royal family.
Something that I suppose I really couldn't understand as a native born American is what the damned British obsession with Kings and Queens has always been. If you look through histroy, you find a couple of good monarchs, such as Elizabeth I, you also find many times when the Enlish suffered under an incompetent ruler, kicked him out, and then proceeded to invite another monarch back.

The above said, my opinion of the English would be signifigantly better if they had had the sense that every other country had when undergoing the change from momarchy to democracy and eliminated/exiled the royal family.
Something that I suppose I really couldn't understand as a native born American is what the damned British obsession with Kings and Queens has always been. If you look through histroy, you find a couple of good monarchs, such as Elizabeth I, you also find many times when the Enlish suffered under an incompetent ruler, kicked him out, and then proceeded to invite another monarch back.

The royals have no power. They are still there because thousands of tourists (many Americans) come to see them, making the country millions.

Scotland contributes more to the treasury than it gets back, and lest us not forget that Scotland is the only European nation with oil :)

Good, and you can stop taking southerners' money while you're at it :)

ROFLMAO, the "southerners" are benefitting more from the oil found off the coast of Scotland than we do from "dahn sahf"

The above said, my opinion of the English would be signifigantly better if they had had the sense that every other country had when undergoing the change from momarchy to democracy and eliminated/exiled the royal family.


Contrary to your belief, the majority of English people are not obsessed by the Royal family, it's just a nice eccentricity to have around. The elimination or exile of said family would be disasterous to the economy (it attracts Japanese tourists in herds, or so I'm told) and would mean that the royal insignia would have to be removed from everything (e.g. ships and as such) and would cause too much of a headache.

I wouldnt criticise the English education system, its still better than that of the US.
Id imagine overall their teeth are better as since everyone can get them done on the NHS, not just those with enough money like in the States... just a thought.
A) I've been to England, I've seen their teeth. Its not that they can't get them fixed, its that they don't give a damn. No offense, but the limited gene pool in England has caused...shall we say...a rather ugly effect, alike to that in certain backwater parts of the US. New genes are very necessary to every gene pool. There is a reason that high traffic areas gene wise, NE coast and California rank so high in both intelligence and physical attractiveness.

I've been to, lived in, etc, the various parts of the US. If I had to really pluck it apart, I'd say that the most beautiful part of the country, population wise, is easily California, followed by the Mid-North East Coast. You just don't see a high degree of physical imperfection on a general level that you see in certain other parts of the country. To be blunt, where I currently live there is, among the tens of thousands of residents, approximately 2 truly overweight people, both from the city. The area's averages in state and national testing is always close to the top. Average income among even the "poor" in the region, is enough to at least own a condo, or a house even if it means renting out parts of it. Illiteracy is totally unknown, and divorce is relatively rare.

B) I've met many people educated by the English system, and I've found it roughly as good as Northern education, though some parts of it appear quite worse. Remember, the US suffers from having the South and Mid-West put into every single average in the country. You take those away, and American divorce, murder, weight, and illiteracy rates all plummet, while per capita income, College-Level education, and employment all skyrocket.

America is truly divided between the red states and the blue states, and the results in our national averages is ugly.

The above said, my opinion of the English would be signifigantly better if they had had the sense that every other country had when undergoing the change from momarchy to democracy and eliminated/exiled the royal family.
Something that I suppose I really couldn't understand as a native born American is what the damned British obsession with Kings and Queens has always been. If you look through histroy, you find a couple of good monarchs, such as Elizabeth I, you also find many times when the Enlish suffered under an incompetent ruler, kicked him out, and then proceeded to invite another monarch back.

The British really only retain the monarchy because it attracts a lot of tourism (believe me the Americans are more obsessed with kings and queens than the English ;) ) and as a figurehead for the people; the Queen's Christmas Day speech is the same as Chirac's New Year speech in France. As half British, half American and half French, and an inhabitant of all three countries, I hope I speak objectively when I say that no country is amazing in every field; each has its merit and.... less attractive side. Having said that I can honestly say that I have no favourite country of the three- they're all amazing!

The above said, my opinion of the English would be signifigantly better if they had had the sense that every other country had when undergoing the change from momarchy to democracy and eliminated/exiled the royal family.
Something that I suppose I really couldn't understand as a native born American is what the damned British obsession with Kings and Queens has always been. If you look through histroy, you find a couple of good monarchs, such as Elizabeth I, you also find many times when the Enlish suffered under an incompetent ruler, kicked him out, and then proceeded to invite another monarch back.

well since the queen has no real power right now, i'm not that bothered. she's never been a bad queen! and anyway it's just a little bit of english culture...if we had no royal family, no one would ever visit london to see buckingham palace etc, so no money...leave the royal family alone!

A) I've been to England, I've seen their teeth. Its not that they can't get them fixed, its that they don't give a damn. No offense, but the limited gene pool in England has caused...shall we say...a rather ugly effect, alike to that in certain backwater parts of the US. New genes are very necessary to every gene pool. There is a reason that high traffic areas gene wise, NE coast and California rank so high in both intelligence and physical attractiveness.

What do you propose, eugenics?

A) I've been to England, I've seen their teeth. Its not that they can't get them fixed, its that they don't give a damn. No offense, but the limited gene pool in England has caused...shall we say...a rather ugly effect, alike to that in certain backwater parts of the US. New genes are very necessary to every gene pool. There is a reason that high traffic areas gene wise, NE coast and California rank so high in both intelligence and physical attractiveness.

I've been to, lived in, etc, the various parts of the US. If I had to really pluck it apart, I'd say that the most beautiful part of the country, population wise, is easily California, followed by the Mid-North East Coast. You just don't see a high degree of physical imperfection on a general level that you see in certain other parts of the country. To be blunt, where I currently live there is, among the tens of thousands of residents, approximately 2 truly overweight people, both from the city. The area's averages in state and national testing is always close to the top. Average income among even the "poor" in the region, is enough to at least own a condo, or a house even if it means renting out parts of it. Illiteracy is totally unknown, and divorce is relatively rare.

B) I've met many people educated by the English system, and I've found it roughly as good as Northern education, though some parts of it appear quite worse. Remember, the US suffers from having the South and Mid-West put into every single average in the country. You take those away, and American divorce, murder, weight, and illiteracy rates all plummet, while per capita income, College-Level education, and employment all skyrocket.

America is truly divided between the red states and the blue states, and the results in our national averages is ugly.

Insult their genes all you like, im Scottish ;)

I know many English people and your theories on their teeth, their intelligence blah blah are bullshit. Your basing it on a sterotype so im going to say that all Americans are stupid, fat, eat nothing but mcdonalds, are obsessed with God, everyone in the south is married to their sister and wears cowboy hats. I would bet the average IQ of England is on a par with the top US states. Your genetic diversity nonsense is bullshit also, ALL modern humans have such a slight variation in DNA that genetisicists believe that at some point in the past the global population was reduced to around 10,000 as our DNA is so similar. England is actually quite a diverse country and id rather live their and raise children than in all but 2 or 3 states of America.
Also you cant pick and choose which parts of the US you include unless your then only going to look at Englands most intelligent and prosperous regions.

Gaun yersel Burnzonia :)

[QUOTE=Barjavel] As half British, half American and half French, and an inhabitant of all three countries, QUOTE]

How embarrassing! I guess I'm tired and not thinking straight- 1/2 British, 1/4 American and 1/4 French- please don't judge me as I'm not usually that moronic!! :( :D

[QUOTE=Barjavel] As half British, half American and half French, and an inhabitant of all three countries, QUOTE]

How embarrassing! I guess I'm tired and not thinking straight- 1/2 British, 1/4 American and 1/4 French- please don't judge me as I'm not usually that moronic!! :( :D

I'm guessing the "half American" part in you took over your rational thought processes there ;)

ps as Renée Z. said, it's sad to see Britain becoming more and more like America in the respect that more women are striving for matchstick figures and everyone is now expected to have perfect teeth. I am of normal weight and build and have good teeth, but it is all natural- personally, i feel that the American ideal of perfection is, on the whole, extremely phoney and one of the country's less attractive features.

I'm guessing the "half American" part in you took over your rational thought processes there ;)

lol :D

Downsides... well, besides most of them arent fanaticaly Pro-European.. (shoot me) ...the british weather. But that isnt their fault :)
lets not be unfair - after all it rains more in italy than it does in england

No offense, but the limited gene pool in England has caused...shall we say...a rather ugly effect, alike to that in certain backwater parts of the US. New genes are very necessary to every gene pool. There is a reason that high traffic areas gene wise, NE coast and California rank so high in both intelligence and physical attractiveness.
while im on a factual crusade - britain is both genetically richer than the US it is also phonetically richer as well with a significantly (factor of 10) larger number of regional and local dialects and accents than the US where there are 7

diversity of all kinds lends to richer society not just genetics


and that means including all regions in national statistics - even if they aren't 'pretty' enough for you

Downsides... well, besides most of them arent fanaticaly Pro-European.. (shoot me) ...the british weather. But that isnt their fault :)

I don't understand how not being fanatically European could be a downside.

So as a you suggested I will be forced to . . . :sniper:

A) I've been to England, I've seen their teeth. Its not that they can't get them fixed, its that they don't give a damn. No offense, but the limited gene pool in England has caused...shall we say...a rather ugly effect, alike to that in certain backwater parts of the US.

You went to Cornwall, didn't you? ;)

Well, being a Gael, let's just say that I don't have anything favourable to say in regards to the English. ;)

Wow, it sounds like there are some really ugly Americans here. Then they wonder why the rest of the world doesn’t like us. :headbang:

Back on post. I’ve had the pleasure of visiting England many times, but not much time for sight seeing. :( I’ve also met and worked with several Englishmen here in the U.S. I like the English. I think they are very nice people, friendly, and outgoing. Not at all stuffy or arrogant like some other Europeans. They also have excellent beer although their food, except for fish & chips, isn’t very good.

I don’t always like their government especially when it comes to Northern Ireland, but hey, Englishmen don’t always like our government.

What do I think about the English? We ruled the world once. But now, we'v ebeen pretty much raped by time and by certain left wing Prime Ministers. I mean, TOny Blair has used the Parliament Act three tiems since he came to power, and this last time was actually completely illegal. We are being ruled by someone who couldn't give a toss what the country thinks.

And before you all ask, yes, I am pro-Hunt. But this is not the time or the place for an arguement about it. Its been banned, and i give it less than six months before the ban is overthrown, and the European Court of Human Rights does something constructive, instead of giving peoples land to pikeys and letting them stay where-ever they want. We need to get the hell out of the European Consititution, and give another party a chance to sort out Labours cock-ups. Including getting involved in Iraq.

Wow, it sounds like there are some really ugly Americans here. Then they wonder why the rest of the world doesn’t like us. :headbang:

Back on post. I’ve had the pleasure of visiting England many times, but not much time for sight seeing. :( I’ve also met and worked with several Englishmen here in the U.S. I like the English. I think they are very nice people, friendly, and outgoing. Not at all stuffy or arrogant like some other Europeans. They also have excellent beer although their food, except for fish & chips, isn’t very good.

I don’t always like their government especially when it comes to Northern Ireland, but hey, Englishmen don’t always like our government.

nice to see that kind of oppinon from people looking in on england from the outside. i've always had the impression that england was never really liked by anyone, after all england was a bit of a bastard in the past!

I am an English and French-Canadian and i have a few things i want to point out about my 'English Brothers'.

We have fought many wars to creat our former beloved empire. I have done a proper search and list and the total number of wars that England has fought comes to a number passing 195 wars! :eek:

We have sometimes have had bad teeth due to our smoking and drinking habits. :headbang:

The English have beaten Russia, China, South Africa and a buckload of Communists at war. :mp5:

One of the main reasons that we are not a superpower is that England is just too small a country!

Me personally, i respect and love Americans. My maths teacher is American and i think he's great. the sheer majority of Americans i have met are polite. i dont think they are dumb but have rather nice and hilarious sense of humours in my opinion.

I mean, TOny Blair has used the Parliament Act three tiems since he came to power, and this last time was actually completely illegal. We are being ruled by someone who couldn't give a toss what the country thinks.


Actually he's used it once, to ban hunting. The Parliament Act has been used three times since it was created. Besides, it doesn't exactly mean that he doesn't give a toss what the country thinks, does it? The House of Lords is unelected.

We have fought many wars to creat our former beloved empire. I have done a proper search and list and the total number of wars that England has fought comes to a number passing 195 wars! :eek:


Yeah, including the shortest war (45 minutes long) and the longest war (the 'Hundred Years War' which was 116 years long and was actually interspersed with times of peace)

lmao - Tremalkier - if that's what someone has to say about British people, I dread to think what is said about Americans. I have to say... what you have 'assumed' to be what British people think... as you have stated it as fact... it's truly absurd. Are you sure it WAS England you went to? Maybe you meant East Germany... they both start with 'E', after all ;)

As a 16 year old english person... I also find your comment on the youth very offensive. Most English youths were never born into an age where Britain was actually a dominant force... and we accept that America believes it is the only nation who has the right to boss people around, just like the police. :)

And I believe you are missing out a very crucial point... American children are taught the very same things - it's all glory and nothing else. I'll think you'll find that if you in fact had a clue about anything in English history, you would know that for several hundred years we were raped by pretty much any group of people who wanted to invade us. At GCSE standard, I was taught very little about English history other than occurences in Northern Ireland and WW2 and it's influences at the start of the 'Cold War'. I was actually taught modern American history predominantly... so I learnt about all your failures instead. Cute huh? I have yet to see a syllabus that teaches about Israel or Palistine but I know my Exam board had questions on British influence in India (that would have included failures, believe it or not).

So. Shhhhh. :)
1)Oh I'm sure it was England I went to, I have the passport stamps to prove it, not to mention the memories of outrageous bills for terrible food forever ingrained in my mind.

2)Good for you, but I've never met a single young englishman like yourself, so I can't really say anything else here.

3) Well I'd say you've got a pretty bad misconception of American education. The fact is, Americans not taught a very pretty picture of their history. Now, from preschool to about...6th grade (7th year base education), its true, you don't learn much bad. Then again, history during those years is basically: Pilgrims, Egypt, Greece, Rome, China, India...etc etc. You don't learn about modern issues, or much modern history. It is only at about age 13-14 that people start getting poignent history lessons. That moment is never very pretty. Whether it be through intense study of atrocities commited against Native Americans (from Amherst to the Trail of Tears) to discourse on japanese internment in World War Two, American history courses tend to spend TOO MUCH time focusing in on the worst aspects of American history.

Now, to get your point about English history, lets keep something in mind here. England, as we know understand it, is a relatively young entity. For most of history prior to approximately 1000 AD, England wasn't England. It was celts, it was danes, it was vikings, it was whoever picked up their bags and went there. There wasn't any English people. In fact, one could argue that up until Wiliam the Conquerer created the modern Anglo-Normon-Saxon trinity of the basic Englishmen, there was no true modern England. If you knew your own countries history, you would recognize that the amount of invasion in medieval england, was invasion of those lands true, but it sure as hell wasn't England they were fighting. England was broken up into dozens of tiny principalities, kingdoms, etc. But back to American education.

The true education of history, at least as I experienced it went something like this:
1) Modern India+Modern China+Studies on Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Taoism, Confuscism, Buddhism, with some other curveballs thrown in. Courses on African history, as well.
2) Up to the Revolution in America including relations to Native Americans.
3) Post-Revolution America up to Civil War including the trail of tears, war of 1812, etc
4) European history, post medieval period. Focuses on England, Germany, France, Belgium, and Russia.
5) Full American History Overview. From discovery to present with in class focus on Japanese internment, American expansion and treaties broken, usage of the first nuclear bomb, Vietnam, racism in America, etc.
6) Modern Crises. Studies of Pakistan/India, Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel/Palestine Saudi Arabia, etc.
7) Philosophy: Focuses on Greeks and Germans especially.
8) Post-World War Two America: Focuses on Beat Generation, Racial tensions, Vietnam, drug problems of the 70s and 80s, etc.


That is a basic overview, leaving out many of the sidetracks individual courses would take, like in depth studies of English colonial holdings and fall-out, etc.

That's what i thought, but Dad told me he'd used it three times. Bloody old people. Can't beat 'em. Shame really.

Anyway, moving away from Peter Kay quotes, I agree entirely. And i also fully support the Hunters who are now kicking the MOD off their lands and telling them to go and train elsewhere. I happen to think that the House Of Lords made the best decision by rejecting it, because now it'll come in BEFORE the next General Election, seriously damaging Labours chances of getting a seat even outside the House of Commons. Perhaps someone should reserve a seat for them somewhere around Trafalgar Square. With any luck, thats the nearest Blair or any of his cronies will get to power for years to come.

What do I think about the English? We ruled the world once. But now, we'v ebeen pretty much raped by time and by certain left wing Prime Ministers. I mean, TOny Blair has used the Parliament Act three tiems since he came to power, and this last time was actually completely illegal. We are being ruled by someone who couldn't give a toss what the country thinks.
Parliament Act used twice by the current administration.

The one thing that ALL successful politicians care about is what the country thinks. Otherwise they don't become successful. BTW, are you really claiming Blair is acting out of principle?

And before you all ask, yes, I am pro-Hunt. But this is not the time or the place for an arguement about it. Its been banned, and i give it less than six months before the ban is overthrown, and the European Court of Human Rights does something constructive, instead of giving peoples land to pikeys and letting them stay where-ever they want. We need to get the hell out of the European Consititution, and give another party a chance to sort out Labours cock-ups. Including getting involved in Iraq.
So, you want to stay within the jurisdiction of the European Court, but not the European Consititution, right?

To be honest, I couldn't care if we left the European Court either. Probably be better for us. And yes, I am claiming he is acting out of principle. He has declared war on the countryside, the middle class, and the upper class. I can't wait to see him crash and burn.

I love Great Britain, about the europeans, its not we hate you its that you hate us and are trying to make us a poor country through the EU, we have to fork the cost for most inititives because you joined a currency that is rubbish compared to ours which is one of the strongest in the world. It amazes me that a country so small controlled over half the world in its empire. This makes us I believe the best country in the history of the world and its a shame it cannot continue.

(the 'Hundred Years War' which was 116 years long and was actually interspersed with times of peace)

Yeah it was fought during England's rivalry with france. back then there was NO peace in England. and england has been a country for several THOUSAND years.

[QUOTE=Landice]I love Great Britain, about the europeans, its not we hate you its that you hate us QUOTE]

Landice which country are you from?

That's what i thought, but Dad told me he'd used it three times. Bloody old people. Can't beat 'em. Shame really.


I decided to check out the parliament act myself because to be honest I don't know it all that well. I came up with this:

"The Parliament Act was first passed in 1911 to ensure governments could set a budget, after peers rejected the 1909 Finance Bill, David Lloyd George's so-called people's budget, which provided pensions and health insurance for the poor.

The 1911 Act was used just three times, twice over the Government of Ireland Act, then for the Welsh Church Act of 1914. It was used once more in 1949 to bring in the current Parliament Act after the Lords rejected plans to nationalise the steel industry.

Since then, it has only been used three times: for the War Crimes Act 1991 allowing Nazis accused of murder to be prosecuted; the European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999, bringing in a list system for candidates; and the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 which set the age of consent for homosexual acts at 16.

The Act states that a Bill thrown out by peers can be forced through a year and a day after being reintroduced into the Commons. The process which led to passage yesterday started a year ago. "

I think your dad might be wrong.

they brought us monty python so they are not so bad great humor, they have the same humor like we have in my country.

But on the down side they did piss my people off when we were trying to get our fer sher of the oceans welth and they sent in big ass battel ships against our littel coast guard ships (p.s we won) but i dont think any brithis people remember it. But you were beeing kind of assholes.
coming with your big ships and crassing them in to our littel boats.(we got that on videotape).

What do I think about the English? We ruled the world once. But now, we'v ebeen pretty much raped by time and by certain left wing Prime Ministers. I mean, TOny Blair has used the Parliament Act three tiems since he came to power, and this last time was actually completely illegal. We are being ruled by someone who couldn't give a toss what the country thinks.

And before you all ask, yes, I am pro-Hunt. But this is not the time or the place for an arguement about it. Its been banned, and i give it less than six months before the ban is overthrown, and the European Court of Human Rights does something constructive, instead of giving peoples land to pikeys and letting them stay where-ever they want. We need to get the hell out of the European Consititution, and give another party a chance to sort out Labours cock-ups. Including getting involved in Iraq.

Yawn, most of the country apart from some backwards sorts such as yourself see 'hunting' as a barbaric practice and are all glad to be shot of it. The elected parliament voted to get rid of it. The unelected Lords wanted to keep it. Says it all really.

Insult their genes all you like, im Scottish ;)

I know many English people and your theories on their teeth, their intelligence blah blah are bullshit. Your basing it on a sterotype so im going to say that all Americans are stupid, fat, eat nothing but mcdonalds, are obsessed with God, everyone in the south is married to their sister and wears cowboy hats. I would bet the average IQ of England is on a par with the top US states. Your genetic diversity nonsense is bullshit also, ALL modern humans have such a slight variation in DNA that genetisicists believe that at some point in the past the global population was reduced to around 10,000 as our DNA is so similar. England is actually quite a diverse country and id rather live their and raise children than in all but 2 or 3 states of America.
Also you cant pick and choose which parts of the US you include unless your then only going to look at Englands most intelligent and prosperous regions.
No, its not stereotypes if its personal experience. I've been to many parts of the country (someone mentioned Cornwall, and yes I went there, and its a pretty country, geographically, but nothing memorable otherwise), and what I've written is based off of those experiences.

Slight variation, as scientists call it, means solely that we have a set of traits that are found in all parts of humanity. We vary in height, eye color, intelligence, etc. However that variation is huge from place to place. Scientists have also concluded that by restricting gene pools to isolated areas, such as sslands (hint hint), the resulting lack of a large-scale gene influx-outflow greatly magnifies all deficiencies. In England's case, weak genes for teeth, in some cases hair thickness, and other areas are more common than they should be because of the weak amount of movement in the gene pool.

Inbreeding is a major factor in all countries, and it is universally recognized by scientists as a major problem for isolated regions/peoples.England's "diversity" is found as follows: English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%. The fact that over 97% of that gene base is totally non-transitory (i.e. its been there for a while, its not new genes) creates a massive problem of inbreeding, and a major lack of diversity. Beyond the cities of England, the country is almost devoid of diversity (I know, I've been there) to an alarming degree.

And to respond to whoever said:
"while im on a factual crusade - britain is both genetically richer than the US it is also phonetically richer as well with a significantly (factor of 10) larger number of regional and local dialects and accents than the US where there are 7

diversity of all kinds lends to richer society not just genetics"

I have this to say. Look at those population percentages listed above. Over 97% of the countries gene pool is totally stagnant, and has been there for a long period of time. The US on the other hand is a country built from the gene pools of the rest of the world. Asian, African, European, even isolated groups like Pacific islanders, Japanese, Australians all have come to the United States. Even its most inbred areas are a mixture of African, Scottish, Irish, German, Scandinavian, and English blood (I'm talking about the backwater areas of the South here as the relatively least diverse genepools). Britain is genetically barren compared to the "melting pot".

Linguistically, England has a tiny degree of diversity. Dialectual and accent differences do not stop comprehension as opposed to common dialectual differences which do (I.E. Chinese dialects). Thereby the degree of difference is negligable, as understanding is totally possible. Different languages spoken within England are largely the result of different peoples who have been living there for centuries. Welsh, Gaelic, etc are all ancient languages. America on the other hand speaks largely American-English. However, large components of the country speak Spanish, some Northern sections speak French as well, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and other asian languages are all spoken in the West. Throughout the country one can find Russian speaking, German speaking, even Swahili speaking areas that just don't exist in England, except among transitory populations!

they brought us monty python so they are not so bad great humor, they have the same humor like we have in my country.

But on the down side they did piss my people off when we were trying to get our fer sher of the oceans welth and they sent in big ass battel ships against our littel coast guard ships (p.s we won) but i dont think any brithis people remember it. But you were beeing kind of assholes.
coming with your big ships and crassing them in to our littel boats.(we got that on videotape).
If you're talking about the Cod War, I remember it. I know it was serious for you, but for us it was a bit of a diversion. Most of us were quite happy you won, since you were the plucky little guy.

Do you honestly think that 99% of the population gives a damn that hunting has been banned? It is not an issue, thanks to the Lords parliament has wasted hundreds of hours debating the issue instead of useful and important topics.
The Lords should be scrapped, they dont represent the public, they represent the top 1%, a representative, elected senate should take its place.
If Labour lose (which they wont) it will be to do with loss of confidence over the intelligence in the run up to the Iraq war, not hunting.

I love England so much, I am the delegate of our fine English region!

Visit the region of England, with a regualr population of 200 max!

His Majesty
Long serving Delegate of England

(Sorry for the obvious plug :p but if you want to find out about English culture and attitudes then come visit us :) )

The english were good until they started to attack the welsh, who won against them the first time thankyou very much!!!!

No, its not stereotypes if its personal experience. I've been to many parts of the country (someone mentioned Cornwall, and yes I went there, and its a pretty country, geographically, but nothing memorable otherwise), and what I've written is based off of those experiences.

Slight variation, as scientists call it, means solely that we have a set of traits that are found in all parts of humanity. We vary in height, eye color, intelligence, etc. However that variation is huge from place to place. Scientists have also concluded that by restricting gene pools to isolated areas, such as sslands (hint hint), the resulting lack of a large-scale gene influx-outflow greatly magnifies all deficiencies. In England's case, weak genes for teeth, in some cases hair thickness, and other areas are more common than they should be because of the weak amount of movement in the gene pool.

Inbreeding is a major factor in all countries, and it is universally recognized by scientists as a major problem for isolated regions/peoples.England's "diversity" is found as follows: English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%. The fact that over 97% of that gene base is totally non-transitory (i.e. its been there for a while, its not new genes) creates a massive problem of inbreeding, and a major lack of diversity. Beyond the cities of England, the country is almost devoid of diversity (I know, I've been there) to an alarming degree.

And to respond to whoever said:
"while im on a factual crusade - britain is both genetically richer than the US it is also phonetically richer as well with a significantly (factor of 10) larger number of regional and local dialects and accents than the US where there are 7

diversity of all kinds lends to richer society not just genetics"

I have this to say. Look at those population percentages listed above. Over 97% of the countries gene pool is totally stagnant, and has been there for a long period of time. The US on the other hand is a country built from the gene pools of the rest of the world. Asian, African, European, even isolated groups like Pacific islanders, Japanese, Australians all have come to the United States. Even its most inbred areas are a mixture of African, Scottish, Irish, German, Scandinavian, and English blood (I'm talking about the backwater areas of the South here as the relatively least diverse genepools). Britain is genetically barren compared to the "melting pot".

Linguistically, England has a tiny degree of diversity. Dialectual and accent differences do not stop comprehension as opposed to common dialectual differences which do (I.E. Chinese dialects). Thereby the degree of difference is negligable, as understanding is totally possible. Different languages spoken within England are largely the result of different peoples who have been living there for centuries. Welsh, Gaelic, etc are all ancient languages. America on the other hand speaks largely American-English. However, large components of the country speak Spanish, some Northern sections speak French as well, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and other asian languages are all spoken in the West. Throughout the country one can find Russian speaking, German speaking, even Swahili speaking areas that just don't exist in England, except among transitory populations!


Your 'theory' only works if everyone in America is constantly moving around, which they arent, people will commonly stay in same town, city, state their whole lives so your 'theory' doesnt stand up. Your point about languages is stupid. OF COURSE THEY WILL BE OLD LANGUAGES EUROPEAN COUNTRIES ARE OLDER. I cant be bothered to go through the rest of your drivel.

But on the down side they did piss my people off when we were trying to get our fer sher of the oceans welth and they sent in big ass battel ships against our littel coast guard ships (p.s we won) but i dont think any brithis people remember it. But you were beeing kind of assholes.
coming with your big ships and crassing them in to our littel boats.(we got that on videotape).

Sigh.

I hate it when people bring shit up that happened years ago.
It happened then, so why should it piss you off? Did you lose an arm or something during this battle?

We aren't the greatest country in the world, but I'd like to see if any non-English person could prove that we are a shit hole, without using the reason entitled "Tony f**king Blair"

No, its not stereotypes if its personal experience. I've been to many parts of the country (someone mentioned Cornwall, and yes I went there, and its a pretty country, geographically, but nothing memorable otherwise), and what I've written is based off of those experiences.

Slight variation, as scientists call it, means solely that we have a set of traits that are found in all parts of humanity. We vary in height, eye color, intelligence, etc. However that variation is huge from place to place. Scientists have also concluded that by restricting gene pools to isolated areas, such as sslands (hint hint), the resulting lack of a large-scale gene influx-outflow greatly magnifies all deficiencies. In England's case, weak genes for teeth, in some cases hair thickness, and other areas are more common than they should be because of the weak amount of movement in the gene pool.

Inbreeding is a major factor in all countries, and it is universally recognized by scientists as a major problem for isolated regions/peoples.England's "diversity" is found as follows: English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%. The fact that over 97% of that gene base is totally non-transitory (i.e. its been there for a while, its not new genes) creates a massive problem of inbreeding, and a major lack of diversity. Beyond the cities of England, the country is almost devoid of diversity (I know, I've been there) to an alarming degree.

And to respond to whoever said:
"while im on a factual crusade - britain is both genetically richer than the US it is also phonetically richer as well with a significantly (factor of 10) larger number of regional and local dialects and accents than the US where there are 7

diversity of all kinds lends to richer society not just genetics"

I have this to say. Look at those population percentages listed above. Over 97% of the countries gene pool is totally stagnant, and has been there for a long period of time. The US on the other hand is a country built from the gene pools of the rest of the world. Asian, African, European, even isolated groups like Pacific islanders, Japanese, Australians all have come to the United States. Even its most inbred areas are a mixture of African, Scottish, Irish, German, Scandinavian, and English blood (I'm talking about the backwater areas of the South here as the relatively least diverse genepools). Britain is genetically barren compared to the "melting pot".

Linguistically, England has a tiny degree of diversity. Dialectual and accent differences do not stop comprehension as opposed to common dialectual differences which do (I.E. Chinese dialects). Thereby the degree of difference is negligable, as understanding is totally possible. Different languages spoken within England are largely the result of different peoples who have been living there for centuries. Welsh, Gaelic, etc are all ancient languages. America on the other hand speaks largely American-English. However, large components of the country speak Spanish, some Northern sections speak French as well, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and other asian languages are all spoken in the West. Throughout the country one can find Russian speaking, German speaking, even Swahili speaking areas that just don't exist in England, except among transitory populations!


You say it's not steriotypes because you have been there [england] but unless you met with, and talked to, and examined teeth or had access to dental records etc you cannot generalise about the state of English people teeth (I can't believe I am actually sticking up for the English here!] just as I cannot generalise about America being a nation of fat, bigoted ,red-necked,McDonald eating, insular ego maniacs!
I have been to many parts of England, Ireland, Europe etc, but I wouldn't be so arrogant as to pass comment on any of their personal traits or assume they were indicitive of a nation as a whole.

The whole world can be genetically linked to a base population of around 20,000 individuals, so don't think that you are in anyway genetically superior to anyone else.

Scotland has a total population that is less than the population of SE England, yet at the heart of lots of the worlds greatest achievments you will find a Scotsman (The telephone, Steam engine, television, to name but three), genes are not an indication of intelligence, scientific discoveries and achievments are!

Of course the fact that approx 80% of Americans don't have a passport and have never visited another country it's a wonder they still have the ability to have such outragous opinions on countries outwith the US.

<snip>

Inbreeding is a major factor in all countries, and it is universally recognized by scientists as a major problem for isolated regions/peoples.England's "diversity" is found as follows: English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%. The fact that over 97% of that gene base is totally non-transitory (i.e. its been there for a while, its not new genes) creates a massive problem of inbreeding, and a major lack of diversity. Beyond the cities of England, the country is almost devoid of diversity (I know, I've been there) to an alarming degree.

<snip>


I'm not qualified to comment on the rest of your post, but this looks out of date. The current aggregate migration in and out of the UK is about 2% per annnum; and, according to the latest Census, around 10% of the current population were born outside the UK. If anything, this is likely to be an underestimate. Census's tend to under-record minority populations.

Also, categorising the UK's genetic background by region looks unusual. The genetic backgrounds of indigeneous Scots, Welsh and Irish have a great amount in common (ie, they're all Celts). Whereas, classifying as 'English' fails to take into account mass immigrations of, eg Scandanavians, Northern Europeans, Jews, Hugenots et al, all recently enough to show distinct regional genetic variation within England even now.

Just thought I'd throw that in, but don't mind me. Carry on.

Yawn, most of the country apart from some backwards sorts such as yourself see 'hunting' as a barbaric practice and are all glad to be shot of it. The elected parliament voted to get rid of it. The unelected Lords wanted to keep it. Says it all really.

Ah, so one of the top two academic cities in the country, with the best public sixth form college in East Anglia, located near one of the leaders in medical research, with one of the fastest growing research sectors in the country, is "backwards"? Just checking.

I happen to think its less barbaric than trapping them and leaving them to starve, or shooting them with shotguns and not actually killing them. But i suppose your animal rights activist friends are of course perfectly civilised. I mean, don't all civilised people go around digging up the graves of 80-year old women? Oh no, they don't. Now THATS barbaric. This is the last I will say on the matter. If you want to discuss it, start another thread.

Your 'theory' only works if everyone in America is constantly moving around, which they arent, people will commonly stay in same town, city, state their whole lives so your 'theory' doesnt stand up. Your point about languages is stupid. OF COURSE THEY WILL BE OLD LANGUAGES EUROPEAN COUNTRIES ARE OLDER. I cant be bothered to go through the rest of your drivel.
You don't get it do you? The point is that American gene pools have a large degree of diversity to draw on, whilest those in England are extremely old, and lack any new influx.

So let me explain this at idiot level so you understand it better.

America: Lots of people from lots of countries go there. Thereby, all those different gene pools are present. People continue to move there from new areas, meaning even more genes are added constantly.

England: The same set of genes have been in place for centuries following the Norman conquest. No new sets of genes are moving in great enough mass to support a viably large gene pool.

People don't have to be moving around, the point is that each of those towns, cities, etc all started with more different sets of genes to begin with, and receive more regularly as new immigrants arrive.

Linguistically, my point is still completely valid, whiles yours makes little sense. I point out that the diversity is based solely off of regional differences in "ethnicity" in England, whereas America's linguistic diversity is based off of large-scale immigration. In fact, the languages coming into America are just are largely older than English and the other languages within England. Whereas English languages are either Latin or Celt based, those coming into America are based on every region's linguistic differences, including languages (like Chinese) that are significantly older than English.

England: The same set of genes have been in place for centuries following the Norman conquest. No new sets of genes are moving in great enough mass to support a viably large gene pool.


Actually, in the last 50 years we've had a lot of mass immigration into the country. In fact, at the moment asylum seekers are a major worry, as many people think that they are placing too much pressure on our infrastructure (personally, I'm not too bothered).

Actually, in the last 50 years we've had a lot of mass immigration into the country. In fact, at the moment asylum seekers are a major worry, as many people think that they are placing too much pressure on our infrastructure (personally, I'm not too bothered).
The problem is where that mass immigration is from, and really where it is going. The largest group of immigrants was (the last decade or so has ended this) the Irish. Thats not a new set of genes. Past that its largely Indian, Pakistani, and other Southern Asian groups, that are for the most part settling in the cities. The type of widespread influx I'm talking about has yet to occur (not saying it won't, just that it hasn't).

The problem is where that mass immigration is from, and really where it is going. The largest group of immigrants was (the last decade or so has ended this) the Irish. Thats not a new set of genes. Past that its largely Indian, Pakistani, and other Southern Asian groups, that are for the most part settling in the cities. The type of widespread influx I'm talking about has yet to occur (not saying it won't, just that it hasn't).

As I was reading this, I just had a thought: if your theory about British people being inbred is correct, then wouldn't the Chinese be really inbred? They have had no large influx of people into their country at all for a very long time (as far as I know). Correct me if I'm wrong.

You say it's not steriotypes because you have been there [england] but unless you met with, and talked to, and examined teeth or had access to dental records etc you cannot generalise about the state of English people teeth (I can't believe I am actually sticking up for the English here!] just as I cannot generalise about America being a nation of fat, bigoted ,red-necked,McDonald eating, insular ego maniacs!
I have been to many parts of England, Ireland, Europe etc, but I wouldn't be so arrogant as to pass comment on any of their personal traits or assume they were indicitive of a nation as a whole.

The whole world can be genetically linked to a base population of around 20,000 individuals, so don't think that you are in anyway genetically superior to anyone else.

Scotland has a total population that is less than the population of SE England, yet at the heart of lots of the worlds greatest achievments you will find a Scotsman (The telephone, Steam engine, television, to name but three), genes are not an indication of intelligence, scientific discoveries and achievments are!

Of course the fact that approx 80% of Americans don't have a passport and have never visited another country it's a wonder they still have the ability to have such outragous opinions on countries outwith the US.
1) Personal experience allows me to write exactly what I have written. I have seen large segments of the country, and I have witnessed first hand what those stereotypes speak of. When you've been to most of a country, you can comment on the whole thing.

2) Are people really so stupid as to think that the base number of ancestral humans makes a difference in gene diversity? Honestly, gene diversity is still huge throughout the world through the basic rules of genetics. Furthermore, one could claim to be genetically superior for any number of reasons including greater strength, intelligence, etc.

3) What country were all three of those "Scotsmen" living in? Oh yeah...America! Scottish in ancestry doesn't matter.

4) And you pulled that statistic from where? Oh yeah, your ass. I know all of 3 people who haven't been out of the country. Most people I know have been to Europe, many to Africa, many to Asia, a few to Australia, hell I know people who went to Antartica. Your opinion is the outrageously bizarre one.

3) What country were all three of those "Scotsmen" living in? Oh yeah...America! Scottish in ancestry doesn't matter.

4) And you pulled that statistic from where? Oh yeah, your ass. I know all of 3 people who haven't been out of the country. Most people I know have been to Europe, many to Africa, many to Asia, a few to Australia, hell I know people who went to Antartica. Your opinion is the outrageously bizarre one.


Two things to comment on, the rest is just drivel :-)

3. The First Steam Engine was invited by a English man named Thomas Savery who was born in Devon shire in 16something (so not by a scot nor in America.)

The other two I don't give a toss about.

4. The Statistics where pulled from CNN and other news programmes. in fact some guy made a wbe page for it which you can find here.

http://www.gyford.com/phil/writing/2003/01/31/how_many_america.php

It's 2003, but he did a good job of it trying to calculate it.

They have bad teeth, milky tea and cruddy weather, but they still rock!

Good, and you can stop taking southerners' money while you're at it :)


Why not take our money back? You've been stealing our money for centuries! The latest being the money from North Sea Oil and Gas!

But the Scots must like the English a little, after all who was still fighting a rearguard action against the Germans at St. Valery when the English were being evacuated from Dunkirk in WW2? Funny that you never hear about this from English historians or tv documentaries!

1) Personal experience allows me to write exactly what I have written. I have seen large segments of the country, and I have witnessed first hand what those stereotypes speak of. When you've been to most of a country, you can comment on the whole thing.



3) What country were all three of those "Scotsmen" living in? Oh yeah...America! Scottish in ancestry doesn't matter.

Yes, you can comment on it but to make sweeping generalisations on the population as a whole is far more than your experiance will allow.
I too have witnessed, first hand, the ignorance of *some* Americans (I have plenty of reletives in the states), I have come across many who have never left their own state yet feel qualified enough to pass comment on the world, but I would never generalise that *all* americans are so insular, there is no way I could ever know enough people of one country to make such a statement.



James Watt
1736 - 1819
Scottish Engineer
James Watt was born in Greenock, Scotland. He moved to Glasgow in 1754 to learn the trade of instrument maker. While he was employed on surveys for canals, he was also studying steam technology.

In 1763, while repairing a Newcomen engine, he found he could greatly improve the machine. His invention of the 'separate condenser' and the introduction of crank movements could make steam engines more efficient. After other improvements, he went into partnership with Matthew Boulton, and the new steam engine was manufactured at Birmingham in 1774. Several other inventions followed, including the double-acting engine, the centrifugal governor for automatic speed control, and the pressure gauge.

With this invention he provided one of the most essential components of early industrial revolution. The term horse-power was first used by him, and the power unit, the watt, is named in his honor.

No mention of him inventing things whilst in America.

John Logie Baird
1888 - 1946
Scottish Inventor

John Logie Baird is remembered as the inventor of mechanical television, radar and fiber optics. Born in 1888 in Helensburgh, Scotland, Baird learned a Calvinist work ethic from his father, a Presbyterian minister. He successfully tested in a laboratory in late 1925 and unveiled with much fanfare in London in early 1926, mechanical television technology was quickly usurped by electronic television, the basis of modern video technology. Nonetheless, Baird's achievements, including making the first trans-Atlantic television transmission, were singular and critical scientific accomplishments. Baird created a host of television technologies. Among them, phonovision, a forerunner of the video recorder, noctovision, an infra-red spotting system for "seeing" in the dark; open-air television, a theater-projection system; stereoscopic color TV; and the first high definition color TV.


No mention of him inventing the television in America there either.

Alexander Graham Bell, born in Edinburgh, educated at home, emigrated to Canada, not America.

I thought this was about the English language, which I hate.

But the English are cool!

The English... *sigh* the futures not bright but it is looking very orange (stupid ornage people with their bad orange tans mutter mutter mutter)

TV, lets leave the inventor of the tv out of this as some dodgy dealings went on with that one... i doubt very much it was baird who invented the tv.

steam engines, thatd be Hero... greek i think and a very very long time ago im not even gonna guess.

our youth... its largely very good youth culture, its just as always the wrost of it is alos the loudest most visible part.

our government... just as bad as everyone elses

our food... my whaa? its just as good/bas as all food everywhere whats up with you people

Our genes: more than adequete and very diverse stop the stupid arguing neither of you are gonna win

our humour... very good for those that saw QI last night, it makes life worthwhile :D that and a few other things

Just wanted to point out that the UK has one of the highest levels of net migration in Europe, higher than Germany, France, Italy or Spain.

As for the origin of migrants, yes the main influx is currently from Asia. It should be remembered that post WW2, huge numbers of eastern europeans arrived here after Russia began throwing it's weight around, Polish immigrants alone numbered 140,000 during that period.

<snip>

our humour... very good for those that saw QI last night, it makes life worthwhile :D that and a few other things
Got to agree with you there, mate. A very fine and noble progamme - life affirming indeed. :cool:

3) What country were all three of those "Scotsmen" living in? Oh yeah...America! Scottish in ancestry doesn't matter.




Actually one of your 'Scotsmen' was not Scottish at all. But an Englishman by the name of one Edward Somerset, Second Marquis of Worcester who, in 1656 showed to his majesty the Grand-duke of Tuscany, Cosmo de Medicis a machine that "raises water more than forty geometrical feet." However, he has been recorded as showing this machine to others as early as 1653.

Steam engines, as we think of them nowadays (steam locomotive), was invented by a Cornish inventor called Richard Trevithick. His first locomotive, a road going engine, was used to take him and a few friends on a short journey on Christmas Eve 1801, later to be known as The Puffing Devil.
The 1st locomotive to run successfully on rails was operated in the Welsh mining town of Merthyr Tydfil in 1804, again another Trevithick invention known as the Penydarren.

here is something that would be really interesting to me and that is what do people think of the English?
i know this was done the other day with what people thought about the canadians and i apologise for copying but i am really intrigued to see what people have to say about us english folk, we are a small country but we do so like to be noticed.
so any comments at all would be appreciated
have a lovely day
xxxThey can take our land... but they cannot take... our FREEDOM!!!!!!!

instead of giving peoples land to pikeys and letting them stay where-ever they want.

Please enlighten me as I don't live in the UK. What is a "pikey?" :confused:

Please enlighten me as I don't live in the UK. What is a "pikey?" :confused:
General insulting term for those you consider beneath you. Probably used here as slang for travellors or Gypsies.

not specifically related 2 what we're chattin about, but its abit annoying when ppl tag the "British" with "English", eg. as a tourist in other counties (especiall the US) they keep say "England" or "English" rather than British, because im not from England. i used to try 2 inlighten them about the difference, ie correct them lol, but ive just givin up now cause 1stly sum ppl just dont get it (u can just tell by the look of their faces as it just muddles in to confusion), or 2ndly ppl try to CORRECT ME, lol, telling me that using English is prefectly legitimate. presonaly (& i think i speak 4 the Celts (Welsh, Scots & Irish) its not only annoying @ times but can be insulting, no offece to 2 the English of course, lol)

England: The same set of genes have been in place for centuries following the Norman conquest. No new sets of genes are moving in great enough mass to support a viably large gene pool.

If I remember correctly a viable gene pool can be in place with less than fifty breeding individuals. I think England can rest assured that it is hardly close to this boundary...

Well, I own a t-shirt that has 'registered Anglophile' on it.

... Oh, and English accents can make me do just about anything, if used correctly...

So, well, I think my views on the English* are quite clear.

:D




*and yes, I know English accents vary all over the country. They all have pretty much the same effect, really. Some may be more effective than others, perhaps.

The youth on the other hand...well they combine the worst aspects of American punks with redneck ignorance.

Well you know what to do with them :sniper:!!

Well, I own a t-shirt that has 'registered Anglophile' on it.

... Oh, and English accents can make me do just about anything, if used correctly...

So, well, I think my views on the English* are quite clear.

:D




*and yes, I know English accents vary all over the country. They all have pretty much the same effect, really. Some may be more effective than others, perhaps.
I say. Could you finish raking my lawn for me, please?
Thanks ever so.

here is something that would be really interesting to me and that is what do people think of the English?
i know this was done the other day with what people thought about the canadians and i apologise for copying but i am really intrigued to see what people have to say about us english folk, we are a small country but we do so like to be noticed. so any comments at all would be appreciated have a lovely day xxx

That's an easy one: "There will always be an England!" :)

I say. Could you finish raking my lawn for me, please?
Thanks ever so.

Ahhh! *must... resist....*

GAH!

..sigh... stupid weakness..

Guess I'm just lucky it's only over the internet. Manual labour scares me...

*goes about being meek and order/accent-obeying*

Manual labour scares me...

"Manual Labor?" Isn't he that Mexican immegre who started his own pizza delivery business and made a fortune? :D

English :fluffle:

I love the english and go to their country every chance I get.

In fact I'll be in london for a two weeks from 27 dec. to 10 jan.

I love the english and go to their country every chance I get.

In fact I'll be in london for a two weeks from 27 dec. to 10 jan.
Ah, you'll do then.

I've left the rake by the garden shed.

I love the english and go to their country every chance I get.

In fact I'll be in london for a two weeks from 27 dec. to 10 jan.
London? Ya need to get out into the sticks - go up Yorkshire and experience a different language and culture :p

No, its not stereotypes if its personal experience.............. Throughout the country one can find Russian speaking, German speaking, even Swahili speaking areas that just don't exist in England, except among transitory populations!

BLA BLAH BLAH BLAH

STOP TALKIN OUT OF YOUR ARSE! YOu obviously have no idea about our country and are just pullin shitty facts out of some random shitty resource! we have a MASSIVELY diverse country! for fucks sake, don't talk about stuff you have no idea about! for fuck's sake you're really pissing me off. don't be so damn ignorant!
:headbang:

You don't get it do you? The point is that American gene pools have a large degree of diversity to draw on, whilest those in England are extremely old, and lack any new influx.

So let me explain this at idiot level so you understand it better.

America: Lots of people from lots of countries go there. Thereby, all those different gene pools are present. People continue to move there from new areas, meaning even more genes are added constantly.

England: The same set of genes have been in place for centuries following the Norman conquest. No new sets of genes are moving in great enough mass to support a viably large gene pool.

People don't have to be moving around, the point is that each of those towns, cities, etc all started with more different sets of genes to begin with, and receive more regularly as new immigrants arrive.

Linguistically, my point is still completely valid, whiles yours makes little sense. I point out that the diversity is based solely off of regional differences in "ethnicity" in England, whereas America's linguistic diversity is based off of large-scale immigration. In fact, the languages coming into America are just are largely older than English and the other languages within England. Whereas English languages are either Latin or Celt based, those coming into America are based on every region's linguistic differences, including languages (like Chinese) that are significantly older than English.

what a huge pile of balls! we have so many immigrants coming into our country each year that (some fascist) people complain! for the love of god, are you seriously trying to say that our country hasn't had any imigrants since the normans! jesus you're insane! plus the language thing is bollocks. most immigrants take english on as their language so they can communicate with everyone. god you're stupid

Ah, so one of the top two academic cities in the country, with the best public sixth form college in East Anglia, located near one of the leaders in medical research, with one of the fastest growing research sectors in the country, is "backwards"? Just checking.

I happen to think its less barbaric than trapping them and leaving them to starve, or shooting them with shotguns and not actually killing them. But i suppose your animal rights activist friends are of course perfectly civilised. I mean, don't all civilised people go around digging up the graves of 80-year old women? Oh no, they don't. Now THATS barbaric. This is the last I will say on the matter. If you want to discuss it, start another thread.

Right for a start im no activist. I have no problem with medical testing on animals etc. So a pack of dogs tearing the thing apart is humane? I think not. Shoot em in the head if you need to curb the numbers. The vast majority of the countries population wanted it banned or couldnt care less. Its been banned in Scotland for sometime now already. Its something that only a tiny amount of people actively participate in there fore the general public either dont care or see it as a pursuit of the upper class and therefore are glad to see the back of it. It will not decide the election and frankly if the desire to chase a fox around is whats going to motivate you at election time then you seriously need to look at the world around you and worry about some real issues.

"Manual Labor?" Isn't he that Mexican immegre who started his own pizza delivery business and made a fortune? :D

Shush. Mocking what I type at 2 in the morning is mean.

*mean*.


(note to self: stop posting at 2 in the morning)

personally, since my ancestors came to North American colonies from England (with some Welsh and Scottish ancestors as well) I like the English as much as all the British, as all are my ancestors...

hard to argue with the fact that the English beat Napoleon (with some help) and prevented Hitler from winning (with some help) so that the New World could come and save the Old World (paraphrasing Churchill slightly).

That English is essentially the linga franca world wide at this point (British Empire made that possible, followed by American dominance after World War 2)

The greatest contributors to the idea of American democracy and the American Republic and its Consistution were English philosophers....

That ENGLISH were the first people to go through the Industrial Revolution which overall has had far more benefit for humanity than just about any other event or series of events in global history (except possibily the rise of Christianity and Islam)

So I like the English.... although the English have a lot to answer for over Ireland, the Opium Wars (with China) and some of the more shameful other episodes of British Imperial history. Since the English were the dominant force behind all of that, going to lump all of those issues at their feet.

here is something that would be really interesting to me and that is what do people think of the English?


I think that the guys from England are sexy.

But that's just my hormones talking... :D

You don't get it do you? The point is that American gene pools have a large degree of diversity to draw on, whilest those in England are extremely old, and lack any new influx.

So let me explain this at idiot level so you understand it better.

America: Lots of people from lots of countries go there. Thereby, all those different gene pools are present. People continue to move there from new areas, meaning even more genes are added constantly.

England: The same set of genes have been in place for centuries following the Norman conquest. No new sets of genes are moving in great enough mass to support a viably large gene pool.

People don't have to be moving around, the point is that each of those towns, cities, etc all started with more different sets of genes to begin with, and receive more regularly as new immigrants arrive.

Linguistically, my point is still completely valid, whiles yours makes little sense. I point out that the diversity is based solely off of regional differences in "ethnicity" in England, whereas America's linguistic diversity is based off of large-scale immigration. In fact, the languages coming into America are just are largely older than English and the other languages within England. Whereas English languages are either Latin or Celt based, those coming into America are based on every region's linguistic differences, including languages (like Chinese) that are significantly older than English.

ok just joining this debate and i cant be assed to read all the previous posts to see if my points already been made... sorry.

this is a stupid point. Sorry, not usually that blunt or arrogant, but really... Just as Weezlepops says, do you seriously think that Britain/England has had no immigrants since the Norman times? Britain is an incredibly ethnically diverse nation, and I should know because I live here. During the 1920s there was a MASSIVE influx of people from Africa and India and they remain an important constituant part of our social mix - and still we receive thousands upon thousands of immigrants a year. Perhaps not as many as the USA, but proportionally to our population probably a similar percentage. Due to the Commonwealth and the shared soverignty with the EU, it is also very easy for immigrants (not assylum seekers, but that's a different debate) to come over to the UK from all over the world (Commonwealth) and Europe (EU).

Plus, it is my understanding that many of the original settlers/colonists in the US were from Britain/England. Surely that means that, if we havent had any increaase in genetic diversity since the Norman times, that you in the USA have only had 200 - 300 years or so of genetic mixing with immigrants, since the USA took off as a country after the War of Indipendance. And even then, only in the last 100 years or less have the rich, ruling class caucasians actually mixed, socially (and therefore sexually) with the immigrants to the US? I mean, separation of blacks and whites went on till the 1960s didnt it? Wouldn't that mean that the US is more inbread than the UK since, due to the old Empire, the UK has had influxes of immigrants since the 1800s and supported racial equality (and thus social acceptance of immigrants) earlier than the US?

I dont want a flame war, and this is just my view from what I know and understand. I love the USA and want to live there one day, but this point simply got my back up :)

Plus I understand that, yes, we havent had (that) many immigrants from Europe pre-formation of the EEC/EU in the 1950s and the UK's joining in the 1970s (comparatively compared to the number of immigrants from the rest of the world - especially Africa, India and the Balkans).

One word for you Tremalkier: Japan. Japan consists of a series of islands with four of the larger islands making up for the mainland. Up until very recently, there was very little movement between peoples of those islands which means that gene pools were established in practical isolation, and, as there was and still is very little immigration to Japan, it is safe to say that each gene pool had very little outside influences on them. Now with this supposed genetic disadvantage to the Japanese, they still managed to increase their population exponentially prior to, and just after, the Second World War. Now you would undoubtly place this as large scale inbreeding which should mean (trying to follow your convoluted logic) that Japan would have been inevitably on a downward slide due to the lack of genetic diversity, but they have become a major worldwide market leader and achieved industrialisation in a record time (though granted there were American influences upon Japan at the time, but, as the American influence was not genetic, it should therefore be argued (again using your own logic) that it played no part in Japan's industrialisation).

I am looking forward to your response :)

No, its not stereotypes if its personal experience. I've been to many parts of the country (someone mentioned Cornwall, and yes I went there, and its a pretty country, geographically, but nothing memorable otherwise), and what I've written is based off of those experiences.

Slight variation, as scientists call it, means solely that we have a set of traits that are found in all parts of humanity. We vary in height, eye color, intelligence, etc. However that variation is huge from place to place. Scientists have also concluded that by restricting gene pools to isolated areas, such as sslands (hint hint), the resulting lack of a large-scale gene influx-outflow greatly magnifies all deficiencies. In England's case, weak genes for teeth, in some cases hair thickness, and other areas are more common than they should be because of the weak amount of movement in the gene pool.

60 million people, and thousands of years of transient and immigrant populations does not equate to a weak gene pool.

Inbreeding is a major factor in all countries, and it is universally recognized by scientists as a major problem for isolated regions/peoples.England's "diversity" is found as follows: English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%. The fact that over 97% of that gene base is totally non-transitory (i.e. its been there for a while, its not new genes) creates a massive problem of inbreeding, and a major lack of diversity. Beyond the cities of England, the country is almost devoid of diversity (I know, I've been there) to an alarming degree.

I think you'll find that "English" is not one ethnic group, and that you are talking about "Britain", not "England". Ethnically speaking, we're Norse, Germanic, Norman, Roman, etc, etc, etc. Britain was so popular to invade throughout history that we're made up of nearly every European ethnic group. And I suppose all of America's ethnic groups inter-breed rampantly, thus strengthening the gene pool there, do they?

It's not really surprising that immigrant populations settle in the cities, where the jobs are, is it? Do all of America's immigrant populations spread themselves around throughout the countryside?

And to respond to whoever said:
"while im on a factual crusade - britain is both genetically richer than the US it is also phonetically richer as well with a significantly (factor of 10) larger number of regional and local dialects and accents than the US where there are 7 diversity of all kinds lends to richer society not just genetics"

I have this to say. Look at those population percentages listed above. Over 97% of the countries gene pool is totally stagnant, and has been there for a long period of time. The US on the other hand is a country built from the gene pools of the rest of the world. Asian, African, European, even isolated groups like Pacific islanders, Japanese, Australians all have come to the United States. Even its most inbred areas are a mixture of African, Scottish, Irish, German, Scandinavian, and English blood (I'm talking about the backwater areas of the South here as the relatively least diverse genepools). Britain is genetically barren compared to the "melting pot".

As I said, there's no such thing as an English ethnic group - we're all mongrels. Where do you think Australians came from? And everyone in America has African blood, do they?

Linguistically, England has a tiny degree of diversity.

I'll concede that one.

Dialectual and accent differences do not stop comprehension as opposed to common dialectual differences which do (I.E. Chinese dialects). Thereby the degree of difference is negligable, as understanding is totally possible. Different languages spoken within England are largely the result of different peoples who have been living there for centuries. Welsh, Gaelic, etc are all ancient languages. America on the other hand speaks largely American-English. However, large components of the country speak Spanish, some Northern sections speak French as well, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and other asian languages are all spoken in the West. Throughout the country one can find Russian speaking, German speaking, even Swahili speaking areas that just don't exist in England, except among transitory populations!

I think you'll find, though, that immigrant languages are far more prevalent than ancient British tongues.

Most of that argument was utter shit, basically because you ignored the massive diversity amongst the "English ethnic group" that you keep bringing up.

Australia is the Greatest country on the Earth, followed equally by England and the United States.

I thought I was a really neat place with smart and friendly people.

Then I moved there for a year.

I'm back home now and you'd have a hard time getting me to go back there.

I've never been to England, but all the people that I have met who come from there seem to be nice. They all seem to want to move here though (AUSTRALIA), and I don't blame them. They probably want to be on a winning side.

I've never been to England, but all the people that I have met who come from there seem to be nice. They all seem to want to move here though (AUSTRALIA), and I don't blame them. They probably want to be on a winning side.

No, we all just want to get skin cancer. :p

That's the problem with travellers, though, isn't it? They're almost always nice people, so they give a false impression of the country they come from.

I've never been to England, but all the people that I have met who come from there seem to be nice. They all seem to want to move here though (AUSTRALIA), and I don't blame them. They probably want to be on a winning side.

*cough* Rugby World Cup *cough*


*rememebers the cricket, swimming and football (beaten 2-0 at Upton Park)*

damn it, you've got a point there :p

No, we all just want to get skin cancer. :p

That's the problem with travellers, though, isn't it? They're almost always nice people, so they give a false impression of the country they come from.

Ha Ha Your probably right

I wouldnt criticise the English education system, its still better than that of the US.
Id imagine overall their teeth are better as since everyone can get them done on the NHS, not just those with enough money like in the States... just a thought.

Having done an exchange year in both countries (high school in US, and A levels in UK) I'm afriad I have to disagree. Especially if you are taking science or math the US system teaches you far more, and is much harder.

I thought I was a really neat place with smart and friendly people.

Then I moved there for a year.

I'm back home now and you'd have a hard time getting me to go back there.
hehe, same here, but I didn't last whole year.

good things in England
- good music
- good movies
- good books
- football (I wasn't interested until I was forced to go to matches)
- you always find company when you go to pub
- cheap and tasty ethnic food
- health care
- nice clubs and venues

bad things in England
- English food
- trains (especially Virgin)
- very conservative people in smaller towns/villages
- expensive living
- wall-to-wall carpets, even in bathrooms, are you insane?
- waterpipes outside the buildings, are you insane?
- pubs close too early

hehe, same here, but I didn't last whole year.

good things in England
- good music
- good movies
- good books
- football (I wasn't interested until I was forced to go to matches)
- you always find company when you go to pub
- cheap and tasty ethnic food
- health care
- nice clubs and venues

bad things in England
- English food
- trains (especially Virgin)
- very conservative people in smaller towns/villages
- expensive living
- wall-to-wall carpets, even in bathrooms, are you insane?
- waterpipes outside the buildings, are you insane?
- pubs close too early

wall-to-wall carpets - did you by any chance live in a student house? If so that will probably have been decorated in the 1970s.

water-pipes - those are drains, not water-pipes.

expensive living - you were living in the south-east, weren't you? (recent study showed that London is the second most expensive city in the world after Tokyo)

trains - fuck, yeah!

English food - none of it's actually English.

don't pick up random company in the pub.

health care - unless you want a dentist.

wall-to-wall carpets - did you by any chance live in a student house? If so that will probably have been decorated in the 1970s.
Nope, lived with a wealthy family. In some 20 different houses I visited, there were wall-to-wall carpets in every single one. Also in bathrooms

water-pipes - those are drains, not water-pipes.
Still they freeze and cause problems every year ;)

expensive living - you were living in the south-east, weren't you? (recent study showed that London is the second most expensive city in the world after Tokyo)
No, Manchester.

English food - none of it's actually English.
Alright. I hate pork pie and kidney pie anyway. Never seen those anywhere else. And it's impossible to find proper bread or meat.

don't pick up random company in the pub.
Why not? I'm not going to take them home with me...:D

Billy Fish: He wants to know if you are gods.
Peachy Carnehan: Not gods - Englishmen. The next best thing.

from John Houston's The Man Who Would Be King

Billy Fish: He wants to know if you are gods.
Peachy Carnehan: Not gods - Englishmen. The next best thing.

from John Houston's The Man Who Would Be King

NON ANGLI SED ANGELI?

Billy Fish: He wants to know if you are gods.
Peachy Carnehan: Not gods - Englishmen. The next best thing.

from John Houston's The Man Who Would Be King

Pffffft. As if you could tell the difference... the terms are practically interchangable (with some leeway for a large portion of the Scottish and Irish).

NON ANGLI SED ANGELI?
Yes, we are angelic (either that or ive just mistranslated that badly!)

I'm English and granted there is a lot wrong with this country, Is till feel privileged to have been born where I was.

There is nothing wrong with patriotism. It is bloody minded bigotry that I hate (and some of you lefties may be surprised to know but if any country can be accused of bigotry then it is those in Europe not the USofA!)

Nope, lived with a wealthy family. In some 20 different houses I visited, there were wall-to-wall carpets in every single one. Also in bathrooms

Hmm, not representative, really. I've been in very few houses decorated since the 1970s that have carpets in the bathrooms. Still, not as stupid as having them in kitchens, once again a 1970s phenomenon (I think it was to do with fitted carpets becoming affordable, so everyone put them in everywhere).

Still they freeze and cause problems every year ;)

I was talking about drains from the gutters on your roof - the only other pipes on the the outside are...mmm, sewage. That must have been pleasant.

No, Manchester.

Ah, my home town. Stop it, you're making me nostalgic. It's a city, so it's not very cheap, but still not a patch on London.

Alright. I hate pork pie and kidney pie anyway. Never seen those anywhere else. And it's impossible to find proper bread or meat.

What's wrong with Snake and Pygmy Pie? You'll did wash it down with a pint of ale, didn't you?

Why not? I'm not going to take them home with me...:D

Well, it sounds like you were in a nice area, so you can get away with it. Have you ever watched Trainspotting?

I'm English and granted there is a lot wrong with this country, Is till feel privileged to have been born where I was.

There is nothing wrong with patriotism. It is bloody minded bigotry that I hate (and some of you lefties may be surprised to know but if any country can be accused of bigotry then it is those in Europe not the USofA!)

Actually you can accuse any people within the Country (ies) of bigotry. Europe has just as many as the US!

Now, to get your point about English history, lets keep something in mind here. England, as we know understand it, is a relatively young entity.


Hmm, yes. Of course. And the fact that America as we know it is only a few hundred years old... while England has been around for thousands of years... clearly, a fact that never registered in your racist, bigoted mind, yes? And as has already been mentioned, our genepool is diverse enough to stop the entire nation becoming mostly teeth, so we're not suffering from inbreeding. I've studied biology, and you don't need that large a population to prevent inbreeding, and the millions of people in England coupled with the large immigration means there's plenty of genetic diversity around.

Hmm, not representative, really. I've been in very few houses decorated since the 1970s that have carpets in the bathrooms. Still, not as stupid as having them in kitchens, once again a 1970s phenomenon (I think it was to do with fitted carpets becoming affordable, so everyone put them in everywhere).
...

Well, it sounds like you were in a nice area, so you can get away with it. Have you ever watched Trainspotting?
I have to admit that I first lived with a horrible family. They were wealthy but certainly didn't know anything about decoration etc. I went there as an au pair but as nothing worked as planned I left the family after 3 months. After that I lived in rather -eh- unpleasant flats and even those were pretty expensive. But then I rented a room from a nice family in a nice area. Oh the joy :D

Well both nice and not so nice. I think the best pubs were on the country side (or in small villages) not in suburbs or city centre. Some of the places e.g. in Irlam reminded me too much of Trainspotting :D

I have to admit that I first lived with a horrible family. They were wealthy but certainly didn't know anything about decoration etc. I went there as an au pair but as nothing worked as planned I left the family after 3 months. After that I lived in rather -eh- unpleasant flats and even those were pretty expensive. But then I rented a room from a nice family in a nice area. Oh the joy :D

Well both nice and not so nice. I think the best pubs were on the country side (or in small villages) not in suburbs or city centre. Some of the places e.g. in Irlam reminded me too much of Trainspotting :D

Irlam hehehehe, that place sucks...that said i live near stockport....not much pride there i can tell you... :(

Irlam hehehehe, that place sucks...that said i live near stockport....not much pride there i can tell you... :(
Come on...tell me...Hazel Crowe?
Heh, been several times in -eh- Voltz (can't remember) It was horrible :D

Come on...tell me...Hazel Crowe?
Heh, been several times in -eh- Voltz (can't remember) It was horrible :D

Hazel Grove!!! woo, i am near there, next village along (see if you can remember the name, begins with a P..) Voltz is crap, been once, full of scallies, never again... i go to jimmys rock world in manc or used to fairly often, plus the ritz on mondays...

Hazel Grove!!! woo, i am near there, next village along (see if you can remember the name, begins with a P..) Voltz is crap, been once, full of scallies, never again... i go to jimmys rock world in manc or used to fairly often, plus the ritz on mondays...

Voltz!!! Well, I never. Anyone been to the Gizum, sorry, Rhythm Station in Rossendale?

Hazel Grove!!! woo, i am near there, next village along (see if you can remember the name, begins with a P..) Voltz is crap, been once, full of scallies, never again... i go to jimmys rock world in manc or used to fairly often, plus the ritz on mondays...
Poynton?
I had several friends in Poynton...
scary

Poynton?
I had several friends in Poynton...
scary

10 POINTS TO YOU!

who did you know in poynton?

I grew up in Altrincham - the scallies used to come from places like Stretford to use our ice rink.

Wow - a thread about the English turning into a thread about Manchester. Fantastic.

10 POINTS TO YOU!

who did you know in poynton?
How old are you? They are all 25-35
Rick (Cummings) and Alex (McKay) I know very well. Ben, Andy (3 of them), Iain etc

How old are you? They are all 25-35
Rick (Cummings) and Alex (McKay) I know very well. Ben, Andy (3 of them), Iain etc

I know of rick cummings, used to be a few years above me at school. wow this is a small world. they go to the pub i do in poynton. the kingfisher, you know it?

I know of rick cummings, used to be a few years above me at school. wow this is a small world. they go to the pub i do in poynton. the kingfisher, you know it?
Of course. Used to go there almost every wednesday.
rick=
http://sinuhe.jypoly.fi/~a8191/wales.htm
same guy?
He was my boyfriend...

Old picture.

Of course. Used to go there almost every wednesday.
rick=
http://sinuhe.jypoly.fi/~a8191/wales.htm
same guy?
He was my boyfriend...

Yeah i have seen him around, wow, we might have been in the same place just a few years ago. now that is a scary thought. cool :D

Yeah i have seen him around, wow, we might have been in the same place just a few years ago. now that is a scary thought. cool :D
Oh it was you! ;)
But if you really want to scare someone, next time you see him, go and tell greetings from Veera...He'll go mental :D





and don't believe anything he says.... ;)

Oh it was you! ;)

What was me, i did nothing ;) :fluffle: :D

What was me, i did nothing ;) :fluffle: :D
you dirty little...
damn, gotta go. I'll force you to send a pict of yourself. I still might know you....

you dirty little...
damn, gotta go. I'll force you to send a pict of yourself. I still might know you....

i haven't got one here atm, i'll tg you about it, if you remind me

I don't know if I've ever met anyone who was pure English. I've never been to the UK but I've lived most of my life in the USA and a couple years in Canada. The cultural and linguistic base of both is English but a lot of people who would consider themselves English really have a pretty strong Celtic mix as well (and in the USA, often German or Dutch also).

I don't know if I've ever met anyone who was pure English. I've never been to the UK but I've lived most of my life in the USA and a couple years in Canada. The cultural and linguistic base of both is English but a lot of people who would consider themselves English really have a pretty strong Celtic mix as well (and in the USA, often German or Dutch also).


IMHO pure english is a myth that is purportrated by nationalists and others. Genetically, we are all interrelated, by birth maybe we are english, but by ancestry we are mongrels, and of that we should be proud.

I just burned myself with hot coffee out of shock!
Someone here hasn't been reading there history books very well, the English were one of the more imperialistic powers that the world new. Now, if you's have said "too weak to hold onto an empire" than you'd have been on the money. The English, like most monarchies, had a tradition of seizing power, and then screwing themselves out of it. Fortunately, the English had the dual advantages of being far enough away from those parts of their empire in rebellion and begin level headed enough to not rip the entire country apart out of spite against their crazier rulers.

OK, so given that you've been reading your history books, please tell me at what point the British government made policy decisions to establish colonies in the USA, or to establish an empire in India and Africa?

Celts rock. I was born in and have lived in england all my life (lucky me) but I am a happy little mongrel of welsh, irish, italian and german descent. Get in.
Now...does anyone want to start a 'what do we think of americans thread'? :P

Scotland contributes more to the treasury than it gets back, and lest us not forget that Scotland is the only European nation with oil :)

Norway? Holland? Anyway, you are aware that were Scotland ever to declare its independence, under international law 75% of North Sea reserves would be in English waters, aren't you?

IMHO pure english is a myth that is purportrated by nationalists and others. Genetically, we are all interrelated, by birth maybe we are english, but by ancestry we are mongrels, and of that we should be proud.
Pure English a myth? How dare you Sir/Madam!! It's all a question of viewpoint. If your lineage is made up entirely of Frenchmen, Germans, Scandinavians, Celts and Ancient Italians then, CONGRATULATIONS, you are English. Oh and you have to lived in England for an arbitrary time period and fix large amounts of St George's flags to your car whenever England takes part in any international sports events, including football, rugby and tiddlywinks.

The above said, my opinion of the English would be signifigantly better if they had had the sense that every other country had when undergoing the change from momarchy to democracy and eliminated/exiled the royal family.

Yes, if only we'd followed the French, German or Russian examples. They had a splendid time after they got rid of the monarchy.

Oh, and we did get rid of the monarchy, before anyone else in fact. Then it all went tits up like it usually does. So we went back.

Finally, I'm not sure the Swedes, Danes, Dutch, Spanish or Japanese would agree with your use of the term "every other country"

Pure English a myth? How dare you Sir/Madam!! It's all a question of viewpoint. If your lineage is made up entirely of Frenchmen, Germans, Scandinavians, Celts and Ancient Italians then, CONGRATULATIONS, you are English. Oh and you have to lived in England for an arbitrary time period and fix large amounts of St George's flags to your car whenever England takes part in any international sports events, including football, rugby and tiddlywinks.

:D


*writes schnappslant into his favourite people on the fan person thread*

here is something that would be really interesting to me and that is what do people think of the English?
i know this was done the other day with what people thought about the canadians and i apologise for copying but i am really intrigued to see what people have to say about us english folk, we are a small country but we do so like to be noticed.
so any comments at all would be appreciated
have a lovely day
xxx

As I respond, you guys are on page 10 and having a high-school reunion (which is wonderful, for British chaps). I am responding to your opening post, as I ususally do. THANK YOU FOR BEING OUR BEST FRIEND (since 1812, and we forgive you for that error).

As I respond, you guys are on page 10 and having a high-school reunion (which is wonderful, for British chaps). I am responding to your opening post, as I ususally do. THANK YOU FOR BEING OUR BEST FRIEND (since 1812, and we forgive you for that error).

Even best friends have argument occasionally ;)

As an Aussie I see England as the country who..

We whopped in cricket test matches and one-dayers.
We whopped in the Davis Cup Tennis
We whopped 3-1 in Soccer
We gave a brief period of beating us a rugby so that they could win their first world trophy in 60 odd years before we went back to Whopping them again in both rugby codes.
We will Whoop again come the commonwealth games.

Mostly u poms are just like aussies. that is aussies who can't play sport :P
except for a few things that annoy me you guys are fine. I don't like...

Warm beer ewwww!
Black pudding (What were you thinking (or drinking))
The royal family

Don't be tooo disheartened by my comments though, my little whinge is nothing compared to the poms that come to our country sit on our beautiful beaches in stunning weather and still find something to complain about.

Hmm, yes. Of course. And the fact that America as we know it is only a few hundred years old... while England has been around for thousands of years...

Well, not quite thousands, only about 1100 at most, if you accept King Alfred as the founder of a united England. Certainly not several thousands as others claimed. Besides, the original point was about all the invasions of the English, pointing out that England existed after most of the invasions, which is fair enough. Indeed, I think it's probably ridiculous to talk of the English, as we understand the term, being invaded since the English today are a product of those invasions.

As an Aussie I see England as the country who..

We whopped in cricket test matches and one-dayers.
We whopped in the Davis Cup Tennis
We whopped 3-1 in Soccer
We gave a brief period of beating us a rugby so that they could win their first world trophy in 60 odd years before we went back to Whopping them again in both rugby codes.
We will Whoop again come the commonwealth games.

Mostly u poms are just like aussies. that is aussies who can't play sport :P
except for a few things that annoy me you guys are fine. I don't like...

Warm beer ewwww!
Black pudding (What were you thinking (or drinking))
The royal family

Don't be tooo disheartened by my comments though, my little whinge is nothing compared to the poms that come to our country sit on our beautiful beaches in stunning weather and still find something to complain about.

We don't like warm beer either.

Even best friends have argument occasionally ;)

We agree again. We must stop doing this. We are ruining YOUR image.

Also (back to post #1, excuse me please, Dr. KellDarely), THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO SPEAK ENGLISH.

who does like warm beer?

England is the land of the free! where you know that you don't need millions of pounds or be and oil barron to become leader, where we have actually had a female leader and a leaders from more than one religion!

We agree again. We must stop doing this. We are ruining YOUR image.

Also (back to post #1, excuse me please, Dr. KellDarely), THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO SPEAK ENGLISH.

MY IMAGE :D lol, my friend, it does not bother me in the slightest :rolleyes:

who does like warm beer?

England is the land of the free! where you know that you don't need millions of pounds or be and oil barron to become leader, where we have actually had a female leader and a leaders from more than one religion!

warm beer is nasty and should never be served as such!

England is the land of the free! where you know that you don't need millions of pounds or be and oil barron to become leader, where we have actually had a female leader and a leaders from more than one religion!

India.

India.

Yeah the new guy is the first Sikh prime minister, i am pretty sure anyways.

Yeah the new guy is the first Sikh prime minister, i am pretty sure anyways.

Wikipedia seems to back us up on this.

*in before the lockdown*

Considering the fact that one of my closest IC allies (and one of my closest OOC friends from NS) is British, I have to say I like them quite a bit.

Yay England and India!!!

Yay England and India!!!

And New Zealand.









Anybody else got any others?

And New Zealand.

Anybody else got any others?
Australia. They know the British own them.

Australia. They know the British own them.

Eh? When did Australia have a female PM?

We nearly did but luckily Mrs Mark Latham was defeated at the election.

What was the story behind the Queen sacking the Aussie PM - I know it happened, but what are the details?

You don't get it do you? The point is that American gene pools have a large degree of diversity to draw on, whilest those in England are extremely old, and lack any new influx.

So let me explain this at idiot level so you understand it better.

America: Lots of people from lots of countries go there. Thereby, all those different gene pools are present. People continue to move there from new areas, meaning even more genes are added constantly.

England: The same set of genes have been in place for centuries following the Norman conquest. No new sets of genes are moving in great enough mass to support a viably large gene pool.


I do love it when people who trumpet their historical credentials turn out to have so little knowledge. There have, in fact, been plenty of large scale single immigrations, and a steady stream of smaller-scale immigration, to England since 1066 even before the recent large scale immigrations since 1950. And let it be pointed out that our integration came largely from voluntary immigration, not forcible shipping or occupation of land.

As far as language goes I find it very surprising that you visited England and didn't notice anyone speaking Punjabi, Bengali, Sinhalese, Cantonese, Mandarin or Jamaican patois. If you want to find Russian, German or Swahili speaking areas I can tell you where you need to look.

And if you think the Scots, Welsh and Irish are of a similar gene-pool to the English, then, well, brush up on your ancient European history. Actually, scrub that, brush up on your knowledge of modern Europe, your preconceptions seem a few centuries out of date.

What was the story behind the Queen sacking the Aussie PM - I know it happened, but what are the details?

The queen never actually sacked the Prime Minister. Im not entirely sure of the details but i think you are probably referring to a double dissolution. This has happened a few times and involves all members of parliament having to face election. The government in power at the time was unable to pass supply bills to pay public servants etc at the country was going to hell because of it so the governor general who is the queen's representative in australia and has her powers used those powers to call a double dissolution. The Prime minister's party wasn't re-elected to government and the opposition could guarantee the supply bills passage. This can't happen anymore because the senate doesn't block supply bills anymore but other bills can trigger it if they fail to pass the senate but they wouldn't be so important for the governor general to act on his own as he never does anything except when asked to by the prime minister. Since prime minister doesnt actually exist in the australian constitution and is a constitutional convention or more of a tradition he is just the leader of the party with the most members in the lower house so he can't really be sacked from being prime minister just forced to face an election.

P.S. sorry for bad grammar and spelling it is nearly 3 am.

The queen never actually sacked the Prime Minister. Im not entirely sure of the details but i think you are probably referring to a double dissolution. This has happened a few times and involves all members of parliament having to face election. The government in power at the time was unable to pass supply bills to pay public servants etc at the country was going to hell because of it so the governor general who is the queen's representative in australia and has her powers used those powers to call a double dissolution. The Prime minister's party wasn't re-elected to government and the opposition could guarantee the supply bills passage. This can't happen anymore because the senate doesn't block supply bills anymore but other bills can trigger it if they fail to pass the senate but they wouldn't be so important for the governor general to act on his own as he never does anything except when asked to by the prime minister. Since prime minister doesnt actually exist in the australian constitution and is a constitutional convention or more of a tradition he is just the leader of the party with the most members in the lower house so he can't really be sacked from being prime minister just forced to face an election.
Like I said. Owned. ;)

P.S. sorry for bad grammar and spelling it is nearly 3 am.

Go to bed.

My sole complaint about the English is that their food tastes like frog eyeballs. Other than that, English people are dandy!

America: Lots of people from lots of countries go there. Thereby, all those different gene pools are present.

Yeah lovely, there's nothing quite like a bit of race-mixing, huh?

My sole complaint about the English is that their food tastes like frog eyeballs. Other than that, English people are dandy!

I'll assume that's a joke.

I spent the majority of my childhood there, and must say it was a wonderful place. I go back as often as possible.

Much like the US, there are left wing hippies and right wing suits, but unlike America, they have a wonderful history and culture... so I can ignore the bickering.

I believe Tony Blair is a good man, and shoots from the hip while following his convictions. That is the most you can ask of any man in politics.

G

Yeah lovely, there's nothing quite like a bit of race-mixing, huh?

I'll assume you're pointing out that that doesn't happen much, rather than making a racist slur.

just make it clear to people out their that there is a county in england called cornwall and a lot of people down here think it's should be a seprate country (me not being one of them). just thought i would raise the point

just make it clear to people out their that there is a county in england called cornwall and a lot of people down here think it's should be a seprate country (me not being one of them). just thought i would raise the point

I take issue with your liberal use of the word "lot".

I am English, French and American, and, having lived in all three countries, I hope I can speak objectively when I make these (personal) observations:

1) All three have merits and demerits but i feel that they are all amazing countries! :D

2) the USA is the most diverse of the three, while France is the most embracing towards its minorities

3) The French language is the best language.

4) America's natural landscape is the best.

5) British literature is my personal favourite (although of course i acknowledge and love japrisot, barjavel, barzac, fitzgerald, kerouac etc.... :) )

6) French cuisine is the best (apart from the few offputting dishes like horse and brain :eek: )

Im pretty tired and can't think of much more, so if anyone else would like to take over...!

ps none of this was intended to offend and i'm very sorry if it does :(

ps none of this was intended to offend and i'm very sorry if it does :(

You don't have to add that. A lot of people get offended here, but that's because they want to - most people here are alright, though. Nice to see an honest opinion.

Where do you live now?

You don't have to add that. A lot of people get offended here, but that's because they want to - most people here are alright, though. Nice to see an honest opinion.

Where do you live now?

ok I was just making sure! I live in London and sometimes Paris, but I have been (and or lived in) other parts of the UK, USA and France (including my 3 month stay in a French farming community near Marseilles :rolleyes: - as the french say *beurk*!)

England is a nice place. As having visited there on several occasions, i have really enjoyed my time in Cornwall. The English are really energetic, and not at all stuck up as to my neighbors to the south, the U.S.A. hahahaha.

Just when i go there, i wouldn't eat the beef. but all good after that eh.

freezin my ass off in canada makes me rather be in england right now.

I'm 16 and have lived here all my, albeit short, life. I think it is very true that when antagonised the *British* will become very patriotic.

Tremalkier, your opinions on England seem to be very narrow-minded, admittedly Britain is not as big as the US, but the difference in culture is the vast. Oh and btw, I am not redneck, I don't like punk, and I am fully aware of the mess that we left in Pakistan and India.

And food! Nuthin like a good (Real! not like that Ginster's crap) Cornish Pasty from Anne's, maybe Warren's or W.C Rowe. Then there's the roast! the most excellent meal invented ever methinx. Can't beat it, but you can't beat a lasagne or a stir-fry either, just another addition to the huge mishmash of grub that you can buy. I mean there's Italian, Thai, Chinese, Japanese, French, Indian...

Britain was multicultural before 1066. The Angles actually invited the Saxons and Romans into Britain (200BC).

And teeth, why? my teeth are very clean ty very much, and my brace is being paid for the NHS (Which, may I ad

Anyone looked at the Empire poll too?

Hey Minas Modred did you have a pasty??

"Rule Britannia!...."

Just when i go there, i wouldn't eat the beef. but all good after that eh.


British beef is the safest there is. We were the first to get BSE on a large scale, so consequently we've been the first to sort our problem out.

I'm 16 and have lived here all my, albeit short, life. I think it is very true that when antagonised the *British* will become very patriotic.

Tremalkier, your opinions on England seem to be very narrow-minded, admittedly Britain is not as big as the US, but the difference in culture is the vast. Oh and btw, I am not redneck, I don't like punk, and I am fully aware of the mess that we left in Pakistan and India.

And food! Nuthin like a good (Real! not like that Ginster's crap) Cornish Pasty from Anne's, maybe Warren's or W.C Rowe. Then there's the roast! the most excellent meal invented ever methinx. Can't beat it, but you can't beat a lasagne or a stir-fry either, just another addition to the huge mishmash of grub that you can buy. I mean there's Italian, Thai, Chinese, Japanese, French, Indian...

Britain was multicultural before 1066. The Angles actually invited the Saxons and Romans into Britain (200BC).

And teeth, why? my teeth are very clean ty very much, and my brace is being paid for the NHS (Which, may I ad

Anyone looked at the Empire poll too?

Hey Minas Modred did you have a pasty??

"Rule Britannia!...."

Warren's? You must be joking! Try wrapping your chops round a Lloyd Maunders' large one - £1.95, a stomach filler and no mistake!

hell ya i had a pasty! i have them once every two months. they are the best! i love the big ones though. they are full of yummy goodness :) :):):):):):):):)

ok I was just making sure! I live in London and sometimes Paris, but I have been (and or lived in) other parts of the UK, USA and France (including my 3 month stay in a French farming community near Marseilles :rolleyes: - as the french say *beurk*!)

Or, indeed, "pref!" as my old French oral teacher, Mme Smith used to say. She really was French, she just married an Englishman, by the way.

hmmmmmmmmm, france huh. well the french are good people, who apparently make good food, but why must i learn their language?!?! why oh why.


It's the lowest mark on my report card every year.

i hate eng-ger-land and the eng-ger-lish. we are (except for most young people in higher education and Gaurdian readers) a nation of right wing scaremonger-addicts, clinging onto every word the Daily Mail and the Sun has to say, terrified of asylum seekers and trrrism. we are obsessed with trying to do our best to take on american culture, we moan about speed cameras, we elect people like thatcher and bliar, we dont want to be part of europe, we have US airbases here, our leader follows jesus W bush around on a lead, we are obsessed with football and beer and are the only nation allowing the current republicanisation of the world.

that said, i love englands countryside, its music (sorry about plop idol), its diversity and fish and chips. i love living here, and wouldnt want to live anywhere else. just i wish it would see sense.

Do you honestly think that 99% of the population gives a damn that hunting has been banned? It is not an issue, thanks to the Lords parliament has wasted hundreds of hours debating the issue instead of useful and important topics.
The Lords should be scrapped, they dont represent the public, they represent the top 1%, a representative, elected senate should take its place.
If Labour lose (which they wont) it will be to do with loss of confidence over the intelligence in the run up to the Iraq war, not hunting.

Dear me...a lot of the population feels quite stongly on this issue - not so much on fox hunting per se, more to do with the fact that Labour are revealing their hatred of the upper-middle and upper classes. And surely, in a democracy, anything that we wish to debate is an issue.

The Lords should most certainly not be scrapped: they are the only consistently reliable part of the legislative process, and a much needed voice of reason. The principle of having an unelected House may be wrong, but it works very well in practice, thank you very much; and in any case, put it open to elections and we'd just get an upper chamber of PC, popularity-seeking partisans as well as a lower chamber of them...

Not that I am biased, or anything...

I simply hate the current Labour Party because of the unfair inheritance tax it has introduced :mad: . Mind you, living in France should have made me at least semi-tolerant of extortionate taxes! :p

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?

Sorry ... that's what came to mind ...

Anyway, what do I think about the English?

Short answer: I don't.

Long answer: Send me a plane ticket and I'll come check ya'll out in person.

No offecne mate, but you havn't the greatest way of speaking yourselves.
And when it comes to waste sizes. Well lets not go there!!!!!

"After all we Englishmen are known for splendid balls."

The Scarlet Pimpernel

Then that joke about Christmas trees and Englishmen both having balls only for decoration must not be true.

;)

i don't buy into stereotypes, which is something assumed in this thread and any other of this nature

England is the greatest country in the world EVER. I'm not biased or anything.

Bah, bloody patriotism. It is the way of madness, for all cultures.

i don't buy into stereotypes, which is something assumed in this thread and any other of this nature

An admirable stance to take. We are all, of course, individuals and should be judged on our individual characteristics. Do you, though, feel that sterotypes have no foundation in reality?

Bah, bloody patriotism. It is the way of madness, for all cultures.
It never did America any harm now did it?... Oh wait, George W Bush.

Two of the best countries in the world are England and Ireland. Good old me. I'm from both of them. Other countries I like include America ( but don't particularly like bush, sorry) and Hong Kong.

The English: The most energetic, innovative, and entreprenurial nation since the Romans. Too civilized to maintain an Empire. I have mad respect for the English and what they accomplished. I think right now though, y'all are in a state of decline. Why? You lack strong leadership, or perhaps your time is simply passed.

Firstly thanks.

Secondly Blair err... he can go shove something where the sun don't shine.

Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?

you can f*** off it's our language and your the ones who can't speak it properly. Also if you were meaning the lowlife scum of England (aka. Pikes, Chavs etc) I aplogise as I agree that they can't speak English properly.
:cool:

you can f*** off it's our language and your the ones who can't speak it properly. Also if you were meaning the lowlife scum of England (aka. Pikes, Chavs etc) I aplogise as I agree that they can't speak English properly.
:cool:
Think you might have missed an affectionate reference to one of our cultural products there, mate. My Fair Lady/Pygmalion ring any bells?

Incomparable sense of humour...

No, its not stereotypes if its personal experience. I've been to many parts of the country (someone mentioned Cornwall, and yes I went there, and its a pretty country, geographically, but nothing memorable otherwise), and what I've written is based off of those experiences.

Slight variation, as scientists call it, means solely that we have a set of traits that are found in all parts of humanity. We vary in height, eye color, intelligence, etc. However that variation is huge from place to place. Scientists have also concluded that by restricting gene pools to isolated areas, such as sslands (hint hint), the resulting lack of a large-scale gene influx-outflow greatly magnifies all deficiencies. In England's case, weak genes for teeth, in some cases hair thickness, and other areas are more common than they should be because of the weak amount of movement in the gene pool.

Inbreeding is a major factor in all countries, and it is universally recognized by scientists as a major problem for isolated regions/peoples.England's "diversity" is found as follows: English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%. The fact that over 97% of that gene base is totally non-transitory (i.e. its been there for a while, its not new genes) creates a massive problem of inbreeding, and a major lack of diversity. Beyond the cities of England, the country is almost devoid of diversity (I know, I've been there) to an alarming degree.

And to respond to whoever said:
"while im on a factual crusade - britain is both genetically richer than the US it is also phonetically richer as well with a significantly (factor of 10) larger number of regional and local dialects and accents than the US where there are 7

diversity of all kinds lends to richer society not just genetics"

I have this to say. Look at those population percentages listed above. Over 97% of the countries gene pool is totally stagnant, and has been there for a long period of time. The US on the other hand is a country built from the gene pools of the rest of the world. Asian, African, European, even isolated groups like Pacific islanders, Japanese, Australians all have come to the United States. Even its most inbred areas are a mixture of African, Scottish, Irish, German, Scandinavian, and English blood (I'm talking about the backwater areas of the South here as the relatively least diverse genepools). Britain is genetically barren compared to the "melting pot".

Linguistically, England has a tiny degree of diversity. Dialectual and accent differences do not stop comprehension as opposed to common dialectual differences which do (I.E. Chinese dialects). Thereby the degree of difference is negligable, as understanding is totally possible. Different languages spoken within England are largely the result of different peoples who have been living there for centuries. Welsh, Gaelic, etc are all ancient languages. America on the other hand speaks largely American-English. However, large components of the country speak Spanish, some Northern sections speak French as well, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and other asian languages are all spoken in the West. Throughout the country one can find Russian speaking, German speaking, even Swahili speaking areas that just don't exist in England, except among transitory populations!

I'm sorry, but this is ignorant bullshit of the highest order.

Two of the best countries in the world are England and Ireland. Good old me. I'm from both of them.

Which must make Northern Ireland one of the absolute best countries, as traditionally we are described as more English than the English and mor Irish than the Irish. :p

The Welsh see the English much as you see your office manager - someone who might be quite affable if he didn't have such total control of your paycheck.

Dear me...a lot of the population feels quite stongly on this issue - not so much on fox hunting per se, more to do with the fact that Labour are revealing their hatred of the upper-middle and upper classes. And surely, in a democracy, anything that we wish to debate is an issue.

The Lords should most certainly not be scrapped: they are the only consistently reliable part of the legislative process, and a much needed voice of reason. The principle of having an unelected House may be wrong, but it works very well in practice, thank you very much; and in any case, put it open to elections and we'd just get an upper chamber of PC, popularity-seeking partisans as well as a lower chamber of them...

As Ive already pointed out the Members of Parliament who are elected by the people voted a good TEN times to get this Bill through, everytime it was blocked by the unelected Lords. Therefore if your wanting to take the democratic view point the Lords should have accepted the will of the House and therefore in theory the public at large. Of course they wouldnt as many of them seem to stand for old upper class values. They are not reliable as the make up of the House of Lords has no bearing on what parties, policies etc are currently in the other House, so situations like this arrize. Its not about hating any class, hell if you want to be picky id say banning smoking in public places could be seen as more of an attack on a class than hunting. Its being banned because, and be honest its not the most humane way to kill a fox.
Its been on the cards for years, its time to forget about it and start focusing on issues of real importance, god forbid an election campaign built on hunting and Iraq while the real issues are ignored.

British beef is the safest there is. We were the first to get BSE on a large scale, so consequently we've been the first to sort our problem out.
Some countries never had that problem. We knew cows don't eat other animals. ;)

don't pick up random company in the pub.

Heh, yeah, one has to be careful. It seems I might have talked to YOU (or Kellarly). You never know what kind of lunatics you meet in pubs :D

I do find your Queen rather sexy!

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/world/0311/gallery.bush.london.dinner/gal.qeii.toast.jpg

But my eyes are on the spunk next to that sex pot!!!!!

Some countries never had that problem. We knew cows don't eat other animals. ;)
And yet our farmers still demanded compensation on the grounds that no-one told them that feeding ground-up sheep to cows might be a bad idea. Like, d'uh!

As Ive already pointed out the Members of Parliament who are elected by the people voted a good TEN times to get this Bill through, everytime it was blocked by the unelected Lords. Therefore if your wanting to take the democratic view point the Lords should have accepted the will of the House and therefore in theory the public at large. Of course they wouldnt as many of them seem to stand for old upper class values. They are not reliable as the make up of the House of Lords has no bearing on what parties, policies etc are currently in the other House, so situations like this arrize. Its not about hating any class, hell if you want to be picky id say banning smoking in public places could be seen as more of an attack on a class than hunting. Its being banned because, and be honest its not the most humane way to kill a fox.
Its been on the cards for years, its time to forget about it and start focusing on issues of real importance, god forbid an election campaign built on hunting and Iraq while the real issues are ignored.
So the commons represents the people? 'I don't care if all the people in my consituancy want to keep fox hunting, I will still vote to ban it.' paraphrased from a response by Ronnie the Donkey Campbell MP for Blyth valley. Ronnie the Donk because you could put a Donkey up in Blyth Valley and as long as it had a red rosette it would win. Yep they really think about who they are voting for! This is not confined to strong Labour areas, it is an example of why party politics suck!
The MPs are there to represent the views of the people who put them there, how can two faced Tony do that? How could he have the time?
Keep the lords there the closest thing we will ever get to honest politicians!

Some countries never had that problem. We knew cows don't eat other animals. ;)

Until this year, of course. The American media were shitting themselves.

And yet our farmers still demanded compensation on the grounds that no-one told them that feeding ground-up sheep to cows might be a bad idea. Like, d'uh!
:)
I'm quite sure our farmers would have done the same thing if it wasn't illegal. We just banned it earlier.

Until this year, of course. The American media were shitting themselves.
yep, they don't know about the problem because they don't test the animals. Just close your eyes and all problems will disappear.

Until this year, of course. The American media were shitting themselves.
Have you read Fast Food Nation?
I'll never eat meat in the states.

Have you read Fast Food Nation?
I'll never eat meat in the states.

or mac donalds/burger king etc etc

or mac donalds/burger king etc etc
I have to admit I ate tens of veggieburgers when I lived there. Never before and never since I've been in MacDonald's. Or Burger King. Actually, we don't even have Burger Kings around here.
The smell is just too dreadful.

I have to admit I ate tens of veggieburgers when I lived there. Never before and never since I've been in MacDonald's. Or Burger King. Actually, we don't even have Burger Kings around here.
The smell is just too dreadful.

yeah, they are real nasty. stick with the fries only, caus at least you know they are made of soya mix...

yeah, they are real nasty. stick with the fries only, caus at least you know they are made of soya mix...
Can't eat fries either. I've made too many portions of fries when I worked in a restaurant. I can tell you the frypans, boilers what ever they're called are the nastiest thing in restaurant kitchens. shudders

Can't eat fries either. I've made too many portions of fries when I worked in a restaurant. I can tell you the frypans, boilers what ever they're called are the nastiest thing in restaurant kitchens. shudders


lol, sounds like you had some fun in kitchens then...

i'll try and find that photo you wanted, if you tg me your address i can send it that way.

yep, they don't know about the problem because they don't test the animals. Just close your eyes and all problems will disappear.

Yeah, what happened with that outbreak of BSE in the US? Have they taken action to stop it, or are they just hushing it up and waiting until the shit really hits the fan.

I still chuckle when I think of the Americans who were interviewed during the Foot & Mouth outbreak a couple of years ago. Several of them were at airports, waiting to fly to Britain, and they were worried about catching it. Cracks me up.

lol, sounds like you had some fun in kitchens then...

i'll try and find that photo you wanted, if you tg me your address i can send it that way.
You've been tged.

You've been tged.

ok, well i am at work now, so i'll e-mail em when i get home. but the pic of you with the sculpture rocks!

I've heard many Americans having a go at British policy in Northern Ireland. Now not having a dig, but at which specific parts of British policy? If this could just be cleared up so I could then respond properly.

I've heard many Americans having a go at British policy in Northern Ireland. Now not having a dig, but at which specific parts of British policy? If this could just be cleared up so I could then respond properly.
I don't think they liked the idea of free elections and self determination, as the results were not what the NY Irish were expecting, you know they are so irish that they think burning Peat is a ritual involving the death of Pete. Or that drinking guiness once a year qualifies them as Irish.
The same ones that gave money so thier distant relatives could be blow up on the way to school or for drinking in the wrong pub.

I have lived in England all my life, and am intensely proud of my heritage. I love my country and I believe the people of England and, indeed, the United Kingdom, could do with more British Patriotism; lest we fall completely in to apathy and compliance with idiotic EU regulations.

i hate eng-ger-land and the eng-ger-lish. we are (except for most young people in higher education and Gaurdian readers) a nation of right wing scaremonger-addicts, clinging onto every word the Daily Mail and the Sun has to say, terrified of asylum seekers and trrrism.

What about the Telegraph or the Times? The nation needs a bit of right-wing common sense. I, personally, hope the Countryside Alliance can overturn the Parliament Act; hopefully then Blair won't be able to force through his whims.
I say all this as a Conservative, though I certainly wouldn't vote for them at the moment; Howard's pathetic. Bring back Hague and Portillo, some decent leadership! Hopefully that'll help people see there's a sensible alternative to New Labour's Pro-EU Interference policies pandering to class prejudice.

Apart from those damned regulations, the EU may actually help fight the ban and the Parliament Act.

But those regulations.

Something about the UK I find crazy is the airport security. It's easier to get from Heathrow to Cyprus than it is to get from Stanstead to Newquay.

Mental

Apart from those damned regulations, the EU may actually help fight the ban and the Parliament Act.
But those regulations.
Mental
My favourites are the banana angle one and the legislation which states that all EU marquees must be able to stand at least 12" of snow or russian blizzard equivalent

saxnot, i have absolutely no problem with a thought out intellectual viewpoint, even though the times and torygraph are just plain wrong, obviously (hehe). what i cant stand is tabloids (daily mirror included), mainly the daily mail, which cavorts as a 'clever' newspaper, terrifying people into voting tory, or worse, UKIP.

saxnot, i have absolutely no problem with a thought out intellectual viewpoint, even though the times and torygraph are just plain wrong, obviously (hehe). what i cant stand is tabloids (daily mirror included), mainly the daily mail, which cavorts as a 'clever' newspaper, terrifying people into voting tory, or worse, UKIP.
VOTE UKIP AND YOUR LIVES SHALL BE SPARED IN THE UPCOMING APOCALYPSE - more on page 4

I've heard many Americans having a go at British policy in Northern Ireland. Now not having a dig, but at which specific parts of British policy? If this could just be cleared up so I could then respond properly.

Very simple; Why doesn't England get the hell out of Ireland and let the Irish solve the problem? After all, it was England that created the problem in the first place. Oh, oh! If you don't beleive that, just read some Irish history.

bloody whingeing pommies

Very simple; Why doesn't England get the hell out of Ireland and let the Irish solve the problem? After all, it was England that created the problem in the first place. Oh, oh! If you don't beleive that, just read some Irish history.

Here's a deal, we'll get out of Ireland and leave the Irish to solve their problems when you get out of America and leave the Americans to solve their problems.

Very simple; Why doesn't England get the hell out of Ireland and let the Irish solve the problem? After all, it was England that created the problem in the first place. Oh, oh! If you don't beleive that, just read some Irish history.
Well, how do you decide who is English and who is Irish?

Two of the best countries in the world are England and Ireland. Good old me. I'm from both of them. Other countries I like include America ( but don't particularly like bush, sorry) and Hong Kong.

You must be at war with yourself. How can you reconcile Irish and English? :)

Very simple; Why doesn't England get the hell out of Ireland and let the Irish solve the problem?

Because there are more unionists than nationalists in Northern Ireland.

Very simple; Why doesn't England get the hell out of Ireland and let the Irish solve the problem? After all, it was England that created the problem in the first place. Oh, oh! If you don't beleive that, just read some Irish history.
When the Irish get out of Glasgow I suppose the majority Unionists may think of getting out of NI.
And yes read some Irish history, ans see how often they tried to stab the English in the back, overthrow the crown, support uprising etc, it's not a one way street here! there are no inocent countries!

Very simple; Why doesn't England get the hell out of Ireland and let the Irish solve the problem? After all, it was England that created the problem in the first place. Oh, oh! If you don't beleive that, just read some Irish history.

Oh, yes, what a good idea! You think that never occurred to anyone? After all, why should Britain want to keep Northern Ireland? I don't know for sure, but with the amount of money (maybe not anymore, but during the height of the troubles) that must have been spent of policing and counter-intelligence etc, it is hardly an asset to the rest of the UK; not to mention all of the people being blown up by heroic "freedom fighters"...

The answer? Because to relinquish control of Northern Ireland would be entirely wrong when more of the populace than not wishes to remain part of the UK. It is as simple as that.

Oh, yes, what a good idea! You think that never occurred to anyone? After all, why should Britain want to keep Northern Ireland? I don't know for sure, but with the amount of money (maybe not anymore, but during the height of the troubles) that must have been spent of policing and counter-intelligence etc, it is hardly an asset to the rest of the UK; not to mention all of the people being blown up by heroic "freedom fighters"...

The answer? Because to relinquish control of Northern Ireland would be entirely wrong when more of the populace than not wishes to remain part of the UK. It is as simple as that.
So support democracy, support the British in NI.

The ban on fox hunting is nothing more than a blatant socialiast attack on the middles classes of this country. The 'New' Labour backbenchers very much want to do a Lenin: that is liquidate the middle classes and their 'petty bourgeoisie emotionalism'.

Fox hunting is a part of British culture. It is has been here for hundreds of years and is very much a way of life for those who practice it. However Labour is fundamentally anti British and it has always been their intent to destroy Old England in any way they can. The valiant and sensible House of Lords has opposed this destruction and forced the sleazy Labour government to have the ban in Febrary hence making this an election issue. The blatant opportunism used by Blair in his attmept to the delay the ban was rightly stopped so now he has to face the consequences of his actions. In 1997 his New Labour promised protection to the middle classses: he has betrayed that trust and so he will be paid back for it.

Fox hunting is part of the British culture and yet our government went out to destroy it. Yet it has protected parts of foreign culture to the death. In Muslim areas people are effectively banned from placing any pig ornaments on their window sil. Bonfire Night will soon be banned but I doubt Ramadan fireworks will. This government has only one aim, one purpose: to burn down old Britain and replace it with a socialist, politcally correct federal state of Europe with neither soul nor personality.

The ban on fox hunting is nothing more than a blatant socialiast attack on the middles classes of this country. The 'New' Labour backbenchers very much want to do a Lenin: that is liquidate the middle classes and their 'petty bourgeoisie emotionalism'.

Fox hunting is a part of British culture. It is has been here for hundreds of years and is very much a way of life for those who practice it. However Labour is fundamentally anti British and it has always been their intent to destroy Old England in any way they can. The valiant and sensible House of Lords has opposed this destruction and forced the sleazy Labour government to have the ban in Febrary hence making this an election issue. The blatant opportunism used by Blair in his attmept to the delay the ban was rightly stopped so now he has to face the consequences of his actions. In 1997 his New Labour promised protection to the middle classses: he has betrayed that trust and so he will be paid back for it.

Fox hunting is part of the British culture and yet our government went out to destroy it. Yet it has protected parts of foreign culture to the death. In Muslim areas people are effectively banned from placing any pig ornaments on their window sil. Bonfire Night will soon be banned but I doubt Ramadan fireworks will. This government has only one aim, one purpose: to burn down old Britain and replace it with a socialist, politcally correct federal state of Europe with neither soul nor personality.
I'm a bit nervous about where you are going with this but I agree with the anti Blair feelings there.
Pay your NI and Tax, then pay again for health and get bot all if you become unemployed. Live like a chava scum, and get it all for free, with never an intention to work.

As I respond, you guys are on page 10 and having a high-school reunion (which is wonderful, for British chaps). I am responding to your opening post, as I ususally do. THANK YOU FOR BEING OUR BEST FRIEND (since 1812, and we forgive you for that error).

Deserves repeting. What do you think?

So support democracy, support the British in NI.

Would supporting the people in Northern Ireland themselves in Northern Ireland not be even more democratic?

And yes read some Irish history, ans see how often they tried to stab the English in the back, overthrow the crown, support uprising etc, it's not a one way street here! there are no inocent countries!

And yes read some English history, and see how often they tried to stab the English in the back, overthrow the crown, support upising etc...


(and yes, the word English is meant to appear twice in the line above)

here is something that would be really interesting to me and that is what do people think of the English?
i know this was done the other day with what people thought about the canadians and i apologise for copying but i am really intrigued to see what people have to say about us english folk, we are a small country but we do so like to be noticed.
so any comments at all would be appreciated
have a lovely day
xxx

Well for hundreds of years the english waged war against us, they killed men women, children and babies. Eventually we managed to fight back and scared the hell out of them. This made the king at that time (Henry VII) nevrous enough to bribe, lie and cheat our leaders into submission and win the war. Not content with having beat us the english decided in later years to ban tartan's and anything scottish. Still not content they burned our towns and threw us off our land and used it to graze cattle. After nearly a thousand years of hatred the english decided to give us back what was left of our country, a baren, blood-stained land most of which is still owned by englishmen. Still, forgive and forget eh? :p

Fox hunting is part of the British culture and yet our government went out to destroy it.
Not all parts of culture are worth saving. Witch burning and publich hangings have once part of your culture too.

Would supporting the people in Northern Ireland themselves in Northern Ireland not be even more democratic?
Can't see what you're trying to say to him here.
The british are from the post this references there to support the democratic decisions taken in NI.

Well for hundreds of years the english waged war against us, they killed men women, children and babies. Eventually we managed to fight back and scared the hell out of them. This made the king at that time (Henry VII) nevrous enough to bribe, lie and cheat our leaders into submission and win the war. Not content with having beat us the english decided in later years to ban tartan's and anything scottish. Still not content they burned our towns and threw us off our land and used it to graze cattle. After nearly a thousand years of hatred the english decided to give us back what was left of our country, a baren, blood-stained land most of which is still owned by englishmen. Still, forgive and forget eh? :p
And turn the other cheek ;)