It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK - Why Were People So Much Happier In The 1990's

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 05:22 AM
link   
To the British posters here, its always interesting to get your take on things...I don't know too much about the UK but some of the recent news I've been reading about survalience over there seems downright creepy to me. For some reason the UK seems to be the "leading edge" of the big gvt/orwellian survalience/politcally-correct bullying trends that are also underway in the USA, but they somehow seem even scarier and more intrusive in the UK. So you all have my sympathies.

In the USA its gettting bad that way, too, but one difference is that a lot of our intrusive survalience and privacy invasion seems to come from big private corporations instead of straight from the govt. (Not that that's fundamentally any better, of course). Although of course with the bailouts and current growing govt involvement in business, "governement" and "big business" seem to be less and less seperate...there is no doubt govt control is getting more and more intrusive. Soon I'm sure there will be almost no difference between the USA and the UK in that regard. Although the USA is still so big and full of nearly-empty space I can't see how they can possibly force a lockdown everywhere. Especially in places like Montana or the backwoods of rural New Hampshire (where the public is very freedom-minded). Also, culturally, Americans strike me as "sloppier," more anarchic and less precicise than the Brits in general, which makes for a harder time comtrolling tings. I'm sure all of that won't stop them from trying, though, and with all the electronic gadgetry at their disposal it will be harder and harder to vanish into the great wilds.




posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by paulcottrell84

A decrease in general family values, morals, and spirituality.



Which was spearheaded by the media and entertainment, of course, the television and radio.

I've lived a good part of the late eighties, and the nineties. I've observed, how the media exerted much influence upon people and how they degraded our morals through the years by slowly injecting more sexual, violent content, and disrespect for others in ads, TV shows, movies, and music.

The media have brainwashed people into thinking that engaging in activities could potentially hurt others or even themselves, must be a cool thing.

They have also brainwashed the people that financial stability is the only thing that matters these days, in times of increasing market competitiveness.

People nowadays could no longer find the time to pursue their dreams. They instead try to find happiness from others which really don't care for them. They find happiness in the wrong places which in the end, hurt them.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 06:12 AM
link   
Thank you for creating this thread. I've been thinking about this issue quite a lot myself recently, so it'll be nice to get some thoughts down.

Political Reasons

I think the base issue is politics. The loss of the Conservative party in 1997 marked the end of the "good old times". Ever since the Labour party got into power, things have gone downhill in my eyes. That could well be a coincidence, but it is what it is. Certainly Labour's attitude and effect was negligible at first. 2001 was just as nice as 1997. However when their social policies began filtering through, that's when society started crumbling.

The children born in Labour's time onwards, under the auspices of their education policies, their benefits policy towards unemployed mothers etc... that has only just begun to take a hold. The effects of the Labour party's actions in 1997 are only just being felt now.

In terms of civil liberties, there isn't much of an issue for me. A few more CCTVs, but that has been necessary in light of the rise in deliquency and chav behaviour.

I personally felt a loss in 1996/7 when handguns were banned under Major and the Tories; and later Blair and Labour. I know some people say you don't need a gun to be happy... but I kinda do, since that was my major hobby. I was a ranked marksman (about 12th in Britain), so target shooting was a major part of my life.

Economic

Labour's economic policy has led to increased prosperity for most. Paradoxically this seems to have been a bad thing. I don't know if I'm yearning nostaligcally for some era that never existed, but it seemed to me that aspiration and yearning gave people more pleasure than the actual material possession. Saving up to buy a new car was half the fun. In the new millenium, people started buying stuff on credit. Instant gratification, but then they realised that the material possession didn't really matter all that much. Who wants a Mercedes when all your friends have one as well...

It's a view I've had for a long time, and has been criticised by most people who have heard it... but I don't think everyone is cut out to possess a large amount of wealth. Inequality was lower in absolute terms, but higher in relative terms in the 1990s. The 2000s have seen the rise of the onyx coffee table and the garish chrome wheeled 4X4, both bought by the nouveau-riche. These are examples of the worst kind of material spending imagineable.

Anyway, I think the core of the issue is that in the 1990s people were less jelous. Because the rich stayed rich, and the poor stayed poor, there was no jelousy. A poor man didn't think he was entitled anything or owed anything by society. A poor man knew that to become rich he would have to work hard, or go into business etc. Whereas in the modern era, seemingly average people (ie the nouveau riche) possess wealth- this triggers jelousy in people as they begin to think that wealth can be attained by anyone without much effort. The become greedy for it.

Some members on here often bash Thatcher and the 80s for the amount of "greed" displayed. However I disagree with them. For me the 80s were a prime example of yearning and aspiration. The 2000s on the other hand, are about greed and jelousy.

Social

The rise of the chav.

Benefits culture.

Some people have said that it's a lack of community that creates the sense of unhappiness. I say its a lack of individuality within communities. There's no pride in one's own accomplishments... how many times have you heard a yob say "Im from the estates, you don't know what I've been through etc etc". Previously people would stand on their own merits, nowadays people categorise, collectivise and ghettoise themselves.

Overall there's a lack of direction in the country. If people don't have a higher motive, then they will struggle to see why they should bother working.

And I'm pretty sure the weather isn't as good as it used to be. Global warming my arse.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I think a lot of people were happier in the 1990s because they came as a relief to the 1980s. I, like a lot of people in my age group and older, were genuinely worried that we'd be caught-up in someone else's nuclear war.

It's really hard to explain to a lot of people who are younger than myself just how doom-laden a lot of the 1980s felt because of this. Nuclear war really did cast a shadow over everything.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 06:55 AM
link   
I dont think Ive ever seen so many people hit the nail on the head so much on ATS.

thanks guys


[edit on 10-3-2009 by paulcottrell84]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by wiredamerican
I do not live in the UK, but I can answer your question. It all started when the Cameras came on every street corner and they took your guns.


That's actually one of the saddest things I've ever read on this forum. It is genuinely worrying that Americans can equate happiness with gun ownership or think that gun ownership is the foundation of happiness .

I honestly pity you.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


I don't think you can judge him without clarification from his side. Admittedly, he was probably talking about concealed carry etc, but nonetheless there are instances where a gun may be required for happiness.

For example, here's what I stated:


I personally felt a loss in 1996/7 when handguns were banned under Major and the Tories; and later Blair and Labour. I know some people say you don't need a gun to be happy... but I kinda do, since that was my major hobby. I was a ranked marksman (about 12th in Britain), so target shooting was a major part of my life.


The only way I can describe it is: What would Chris Hoy feel like if they took away his bike?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


I don't think you can judge him without clarification from his side. Admittedly, he was probably talking about concealed carry etc, but nonetheless there are instances where a gun may be required for happiness.


So, you're telling me you couldn't possibly be happy without a gun? That you've never been happy since? If you have had happiness since, then it suggests guns aren't really the key to happiness.

If you haven't experienced happiness in the last decade, I think that's more about some psychological issue than the fact that you no longer have a gun.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Its not so black and white. Im surprised that you're treating it as such... I thought you were more logical than that.

Im not saying that I sit in a corner crying without guns.

Its just that my quality of life has decreased as a result of not being able to conduct the hobby of my choice through no fault of my own.

Its not the only factor- but it certainly contributes to what makes the 90s better than the 00s for me personally.

Edit : Its just like any other factor, including community cohesion. It's a nice thing to have but nobody is going to be depressed forever just because his neighbour isnt as nice as he used to be.

I personally think the only single factor which can cause prolonged and sustained misery is a lack of direction in life. When people have a purpose, they are much happier.

[edit on 10-3-2009 by 44soulslayer]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:02 AM
link   
I think the 80's from what I've heard was a great time, lot's of fun, and crazy fashion etc.

So when the 90's came, everything calmed down a bit, and people where generally in a pretty happy mood, but when the millenium came, the whole world starting to appear depressing, every day you hear worst things, and you feel closer to midnight every day.

Maybe we need another 80's!? haha

[edit on 10-3-2009 by _Phoenix_]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Its not so black and white. Im surprised that you're treating it as such... I thought you were more logical than that.

Im not saying that I sit in a corner crying without guns.

Its just that my quality of life has decreased as a result of not being able to conduct the hobby of my choice through no fault of my own.

Its not the only factor- but it certainly contributes to what makes the 90s better than the 00s for me personally.


I'm not seeing it in "black and white" - anything but. I'm taking the thread to mean widespread general factors that contributed to the happiness of "people" generally during the 1990s. Your very personal story is hardly representative!

The points I made about your inability to partake in your sport though still stand though. If you miss any kind of social aspect of the shooting, that's fair enough, but not specific to gun sports. You will have made friends or enjoyed other social contact since not being able to shoot. If you miss any kind of competitive element that's perhaps understandable too - if you're a competitive person that is - but it's not like competitive sports or opportunities to 'win' have been outlawed generally. If you still want to be the best in something, there are plenty of avenues and outlets.

However, if all comes down to the gun itself and it's not a related issue like I've mentioned above, then yes, I really do think there's a psychological issue!



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   
for me personally its a few things have changed that have made my life worse

firstly i cant smoke in pubs anymore so dont go as much

secondly, i cant go to football matches anymore and stand and sing without getting told to sit down and shut up or get thrown out and banned

Thirdly, i cant drive anywhere without worrying about speed cameras

fourth, we live in a nanny state where almost anything thats fun (to me, other people wont like the same things i do) is considered bad and/or illegal

If john titors reading this, please take me back



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
I personally felt a loss in 1996/7 when handguns were banned under Major and the Tories; and later Blair and Labour. I know some people say you don't need a gun to be happy... but I kinda do, since that was my major hobby. I was a ranked marksman (about 12th in Britain), so target shooting was a major part of my life.


I'm with you on this one. My ex girlfriend's Dad's favorite hobby of all time was his gun's his life was his guns, shotguns, rifles and particularly his handguns. He used to take great pride in cleaning and polishing them, he even had his own custom made shooting range build at the side of his house, and when they took them away from him, I think he must of felt the same way you'd expect to feel after being robbed, and I think it changed his view on a lot of things. I could guarantee if I asked him why people were happier in the 90's he'd say the same thing. It'd be kinda like going to a snooker club and taking their cue's because they could be used as a weapon.
That would especially piss me off if I was 12th best snooker champion of Britain.

p.s that doesn't mean I think guns can create happiness so yeah I think we can get over it.

[edit on 10-3-2009 by paulcottrell84]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Thats a highly convoluted argument in an attempt to save face IMO.

Sports cannot be characterised as "sports" under a generic heading, with physical attributes of each one being interchangeable.

Now going back to my Chris Hoy example... would you tell him that he could still enjoy the competitive thrill of racing via go-karting, if you confiscated his bike?

Would you tell Redgrave to use an indoor rowing machine if you banned him from using a boat?

Its absolutely ludicrous.

The things I miss about shooting are the unique aspects of the sport itself. It cannot be defined and catagorised into neat little bundles like "community" and "competition".

It's not the gun I miss, its the sport. I shouldn't be told to find a new sport and suck it up, when the first one was banned for sketchy reasons at best.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by 44soulslayer
 


I think it all came down to the Governments fear of the guns getting into the wrong hands, through burglaries and people not locking them away properly.
Iv heard of cases were unregistered guns have gone missing and not being reported, maybe that's what contributed to the ban.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Thats a highly convoluted argument in an attempt to save face IMO.


Well, it might be your opinion but it's not the reality of it. For one, when you jumped in regarding guns, it was a tenuous link to what the other poster was talking about anyway. We both know he wasn't talking about your shooting competitions. It's a bit audacious to accuse me of being 'convoluted' here.

The thread was about a general theme not personal 'tragedies' - the vast bulk of posts (including the bulk of your own) reflected that. I can match your personal experience with my own as, personally, parts of the 1990s were truly dire for me. First, I had an injury that stopped me - a month before I was to go - pursuing a music degree. Career over. I can play to an extent now and make music on other instruments, but it's not the same. However, I acknowledge that similar incidents aren't wide-ranging factors.

In another incident, I was hospitalised for a long time - the best part of two years. A lot of the early 1990s was genuinely crap for me. Is that important in the greater picture? No. I don't see your shooting as being any different, I'm afraid. Relatively localised incidents that have no bearing on the vast bulk of the population and how the 1990s are perceived as being a better (or worse) decade than the 1980s.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
not relevent


[edit on 10-3-2009 by paulcottrell84]

[edit on 10-3-2009 by paulcottrell84]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
I know


[edit on 10-3-2009 by paulcottrell84]

[edit on 10-3-2009 by paulcottrell84]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


It was a "personal tragedy" for me, and 57,000 other legal sport shooters.

It would have remained as such if it were only through a personal loss. However the fact is the manner of the loss was illegalisation through legislation by government action.

That brings it into the public domain, does it not?

I'm sorry that you suffered personal tragedies in the 90s but that doesnt really compare to a government-created tragedy such as the illegalisation of handguns.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Britain is simply experiencing Karma for distributing crap like Atomic Kitten, Westlife, etc., around the world.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join