Originally posted by Baldur
reply to post by rich23
I'm not speaking of solid facts here
I can tell.
They may be for idiots, but they are also a very convenient way of composing an image of a nation's people, especially if you've never met somebody
from the country, have met very few or have only met rich tourists. Oh, and there are a lot of idiots around the world.
And you seem to be speaking their language. Good for you.
I'll clarify that, the Kings/Queens of the commonwealth have mostly been English.
Again, facts - verifiable ones - suggest differently. From the Normans (northern French) who invaded in the eleventh century, to the Stuarts
(Scottish), the Orange (Dutch) in the seventeenth century, to the houses of Hanover and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (changed to Windsor in WWI to forestall
anti-German sentiment) - the ruling houses of the British Empire have mostly been NON-English. Have a look at
if you don't believe me.
Belize? How about asking an Aussie aborigine or Indian American?
I rather think the former would concentrate on the Australian
government, and it is, again, a matter of historical fact that most of the genocide of the American Indian took place after
It's also a matter of historical fact that the Spanish were responsible for appalling levels of genocide in the New World. Read Howard Zinn's A
People's History of the United States
for fuller details.
It's kind of a clue that apartheid is an Afrikaans word
. The Boers and the British South Africans were at loggerheads: apartheid was
introduced by the National Party (Boers) in 1948. Again, your grasp of historical fact is pretty shaky.
East India Trading Company ring any bells? Slavery? The Crusades?
Any more random stuff you'd like to throw in? I mean, I could give you a rather more accurate list of British atrocities, but that wouldn't be as
much fun as watching you flail.
America's another great example of a country that had to shed masses of blood to get independence from the Empire.
Approximately 25,000 American Revolutionaries died during active military service. About 8,000 of these deaths were in battle; the other 17,000
deaths were from disease, including about 8,000 – 12,000 who died while prisoners of war...
Funny, they managed to kill rather more of themselves during the Civil War (which was, supposedly, about slavery)...
It remains the deadliest war in American history, resulting in the deaths of 620,000 soldiers and an undetermined number of civilian
I suppose some good sentiments remain from countries that were basically dropped from the roster due to in-sustainability on the part of the
Empire but there have been plenty countries that have fought tooth and nail for their liberty, with good reason.
all sorts of things.
I'm not going to bother backing either up, because it's common knowledge.
All sorts of things are "common knowledge". People believe all sorts of nonsense. And of course you're not going to back anything up, I'm not
expecting you to. Please feel free to peddle your unsubstantiated nonsense: I'm more than happy to keep confusing you with facts.
Everybody knows England is really just another piece on the board for America to play anyway, especially since Cameron The PR Boy is elected -
he seems to worship materialism.
A point you seem unable to grasp is that the US runs its hegemony through puppets. The British Empire was explicit, not covert, and therefore had to
at least nod toward a sense of responsibility: which is why Gandhi was able to mobilise public opinion within the UK
against the colonial
mind-set. If no-one knows the US is the puppet master, or if, at least, this fact is not openly acknowledged, getting out from under is much more
Oh, as for Orwell - that was written in 1945. World War II. Think about it.
I have. I don't believe you bothered to, however. My point is that there has been an undercurrent of anti-semitism in British culture for many
years. The more recent "random" article was intended to show that at least some people (ok, Jewish people) still consider there's a problem. The
fascist mentality is still around, and it seems to me likely that there will always be a small proportion of any population that needs a hate group,
be it Jews...
... or Muslims. As for Islamophobia - there is a section of the UK press that exists to pander to the kind of people who feel threatened by
"otherness".... Immigrants, Muslims, Yardies, whoever. It's not as if I'd claim that the English are any more sensible than any similarly
propagandised nation. Nor am I claiming that anti-semitism is "worse" or more prevalent than Islamophobia.