Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,069
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 1, 2016 14:55:52 GMT -5
While I agree that America's tendency to think it leads the world does it absolutely no favours abroad, I simultaneously think that you have to accept that the influence of the United States, socially, politically and culturally, on the world over the last 70 years has been massive. I mean, just look at the Americanisation of Britain over that time? I really do think that it's difficult to overestimate the influence of the world's only remaining Superpower in our home country, ting. Even in my own relatively short lifetime, I've seen England become much more Americanised than it was in the '80s -- especially socially and culturally. Don't get me wrong though, I'm as much of a fully paid-up member of The Kinks' "Village Green Preservation Society" as any sensible Englishman, but the fact remains, America has been a dominant influence and powerful agent of change (not necessarily progress) for the UK in recent decades. I'm not saying that's necessarily right, but I am saying that it's an unassailable fact. Oh, I agree that's it's a fact that American culture has had a big impact on British society in the last twenty or thirty years: it's just a fact that I really don't like. Again, no offence intended to anyone, but I happen to believe our own unique culture and traditions are worth holding on to, and that the more homogenized the world becomes, the more all it's individual nations and cultures lose. It's the same reason I have always been opposed to the idea of a European superstate (or one of the reasons, anyway). Can't say I disagree with any of this, ting. I'm with Morrissey when he said, "Everything went downhill from the moment the McDonald’s chain was given license to invade England – To me it was like the outbreak of war and I couldn’t understand why English troops weren’t retaliating"
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 1, 2016 16:02:52 GMT -5
While I agree that America's tendency to think it leads the world does it absolutely no favours abroad, I simultaneously think that you have to accept that the influence of the United States, socially, politically and culturally, on the world over the last 70 years has been massive. I mean, just look at the Americanisation of Britain over that time? I really do think that it's difficult to overestimate the influence of the world's only remaining Superpower in our home country, ting. Even in my own relatively short lifetime, I've seen England become much more Americanised than it was in the '80s -- especially socially and culturally. Don't get me wrong though, I'm as much of a fully paid-up member of The Kinks' "Village Green Preservation Society" as any sensible Englishman, but the fact remains, America has been a dominant influence and powerful agent of change (not necessarily progress) for the UK in recent decades. I'm not saying that's necessarily right, but I am saying that it's an unassailable fact. Oh, I agree that's it's a fact that American culture has had a big impact on British society in the last twenty or thirty years: it's just a fact that I really don't like. Again, no offence intended to anyone, but I happen to believe our own unique culture and traditions are worth holding on to, and that the more homogenized the world becomes, the more all it's individual nations and cultures lose. It's the same reason I have always been opposed to the idea of a European superstate (or one of the reasons, anyway). The tricky part of the question is, though, that the UK needs closer ties to Europe precisely to counter that overwhelming US influence. The language barrier will always help the Brits maintain their cultural independence from the rest of Europe. And the UK would be a major player in Europe while it can only ever be a junior partner at best in relation to the US. Canada's in a similar but even worse predicament, since without the advantages enjoyed by the UK: no Europe next door to counter-balance American cultural domination, no long, deeply established history and tradition to bolster its own unique identity, not even a strongly distinguished difference in accent (though the difference does exist, subtle though it may be). We're pretty much screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 16:59:16 GMT -5
I have to say that the vast, vast majority of people over here in the UK -- along with both the left-leaning and right-leaning media -- are utterly dumbfounded that someone as ignorant, xenophobic, inarticulate, sexist and down right racist as Trump could have ever gotten this close to the White House. It's hard to believe that this is the same country that only 4 years ago re-elected Barack Obama, who, regardless of what you think of his homeland policies, has been a superb ambassador for the U.S. overseas -- something that the U.S. badly needed, might I add. It seems like such a head scratcher to many of us over here. I mean, sure, we do have our own outspokenly ignorant, xenophobic, sexist politicians, but they're mostly confined to the right-wing, populist party UKIP. That party have garnered a fair bit of public support in recent years (so, we as a nation, do understand the appeal of populist politics), but, while a lot of what UKIP spouts is unrealistic, isolationist drivel, actually, having UKIP representatives in the House of Commons and the House of Lords works quite well to flavour the overall soup of British democracy. But someone like UKIP's Nigel Farage would never come close to becoming the Prime Minister, in the way that Trump has come so close to being President. Now, I realise that Clinton is hardly whiter than white (and plenty of folks I've spoken to feel truly sorry for the Americans, having to essentially pick the least offensive turd out of the toilet bowl), but come on...Trump as president would be an utter disaster, both in terms of America at home and foreign policy abroad. He's an empty vessel making the most noise -- big on rhetoric and sloganeering, but mighty short on how he's going to actually deliver any of the things he promises. He is a dangerous, dangerous man and the feeling "on the street" over here (if I may be permitted to speak on behalf of the nation) is that if he becomes president, World War III won't be far behind. Personally speaking, if Trump does win the election, it will be a real "stop the world, I wanna get off" moment for me. Completely disagree of course. But if the UK you speak of does abhor Trump the way you do, it's free not to associate with the USA anymore if he wins as a mark of protest...and I seriously doubt it will do that.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Nov 1, 2016 17:20:22 GMT -5
Can't say I disagree with any of this, ting. I'm with Morrissey when he said, "Everything went downhill from the moment the McDonald’s chain was given license to invade England – To me it was like the outbreak of war and I couldn’t understand why English troops weren’t retaliating" But the English troops are still in there fighting: "... Offering up its signature batter dip't fish, shrimp, chicken and oversized french fries known as "Chips" since 1969, Arthur Treacher's Fish & Chips was founded in part by, among others, food service legend Dave Thomas. Over the years, the restaurant has built a tremendous customer following by maintaining its core menu, proprietary process and undeniably delicious secret batter diners crave. The concept currently has over 100 locations throughout the eastern portion of the United States with a healthy blend of mall, in-line and freestanding units."
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 1, 2016 17:21:27 GMT -5
Oh, I agree that's it's a fact that American culture has had a big impact on British society in the last twenty or thirty years: it's just a fact that I really don't like. Again, no offence intended to anyone, but I happen to believe our own unique culture and traditions are worth holding on to, and that the more homogenized the world becomes, the more all it's individual nations and cultures lose. It's the same reason I have always been opposed to the idea of a European superstate (or one of the reasons, anyway). The tricky part of the question is, though, that the UK needs closer ties to Europe precisely to counter that overwhelming US influence. The language barrier will always help the Brits maintain their cultural independence from the rest of Europe. And the UK would be a major player in Europe while it can only ever be a junior partner at best in relation to the US. Canada's in a similar but even worse predicament, since without the advantages enjoyed by the UK: no Europe next door to counter-balance American cultural domination, no long, deeply established history and tradition to bolster its own unique identity, not even a strongly distinguished difference in accent (though the difference does exist, subtle though it may be). We're pretty much screwed. Time for us all to switch to French, berk! O Canada, Terre de nos aïeux... (pompopom)
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 1, 2016 17:23:21 GMT -5
Sensible article in the Atlantic. It's worth reminding electors of the respective faults of the two candidates.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 1, 2016 18:28:52 GMT -5
Oh, I agree that's it's a fact that American culture has had a big impact on British society in the last twenty or thirty years: it's just a fact that I really don't like. Again, no offence intended to anyone, but I happen to believe our own unique culture and traditions are worth holding on to, and that the more homogenized the world becomes, the more all it's individual nations and cultures lose. It's the same reason I have always been opposed to the idea of a European superstate (or one of the reasons, anyway). The tricky part of the question is, though, that the UK needs closer ties to Europe precisely to counter that overwhelming US influence. The language barrier will always help the Brits maintain their cultural independence from the rest of Europe. And the UK would be a major player in Europe while it can only ever be a junior partner at best in relation to the US. I totally disagree. I don't see why we should ever be a "junior partner" to anyone, or indeed need to be a "partner" of any kind to anyone. Britain doesn't need either the EU or the US, and putting itself in a position where it believed it did was precisely where we went wrong. And what "language barrier"? Most of Europe speaks English as a second language anyway!
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 1, 2016 18:29:54 GMT -5
I have to say that the vast, vast majority of people over here in the UK -- along with both the left-leaning and right-leaning media -- are utterly dumbfounded that someone as ignorant, xenophobic, inarticulate, sexist and down right racist as Trump could have ever gotten this close to the White House. It's hard to believe that this is the same country that only 4 years ago re-elected Barack Obama, who, regardless of what you think of his homeland policies, has been a superb ambassador for the U.S. overseas -- something that the U.S. badly needed, might I add. It seems like such a head scratcher to many of us over here. I mean, sure, we do have our own outspokenly ignorant, xenophobic, sexist politicians, but they're mostly confined to the right-wing, populist party UKIP. That party have garnered a fair bit of public support in recent years (so, we as a nation, do understand the appeal of populist politics), but, while a lot of what UKIP spouts is unrealistic, isolationist drivel, actually, having UKIP representatives in the House of Commons and the House of Lords works quite well to flavour the overall soup of British democracy. But someone like UKIP's Nigel Farage would never come close to becoming the Prime Minister, in the way that Trump has come so close to being President. Now, I realise that Clinton is hardly whiter than white (and plenty of folks I've spoken to feel truly sorry for the Americans, having to essentially pick the least offensive turd out of the toilet bowl), but come on...Trump as president would be an utter disaster, both in terms of America at home and foreign policy abroad. He's an empty vessel making the most noise -- big on rhetoric and sloganeering, but mighty short on how he's going to actually deliver any of the things he promises. He is a dangerous, dangerous man and the feeling "on the street" over here (if I may be permitted to speak on behalf of the nation) is that if he becomes president, World War III won't be far behind. Personally speaking, if Trump does win the election, it will be a real "stop the world, I wanna get off" moment for me. Completely disagree of course. But if the UK you speak of does abhor Trump the way you do, it's free not to associate with the USA anymore if he wins as a mark of protest...and I seriously doubt it will do that. Why?
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 1, 2016 18:31:52 GMT -5
Can't say I disagree with any of this, ting. I'm with Morrissey when he said, "Everything went downhill from the moment the McDonald’s chain was given license to invade England – To me it was like the outbreak of war and I couldn’t understand why English troops weren’t retaliating" But the English troops are still in there fighting: "... Offering up its signature batter dip't fish, shrimp, chicken and oversized french fries known as "Chips" since 1969, Arthur Treacher's Fish & Chips was founded in part by, among others, food service legend Dave Thomas. Over the years, the restaurant has built a tremendous customer following by maintaining its core menu, proprietary process and undeniably delicious secret batter diners crave. The concept currently has over 100 locations throughout the eastern portion of the United States with a healthy blend of mall, in-line and freestanding units." They are not "oversized French fries known as "chips". They are chips.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 1, 2016 19:28:45 GMT -5
From a Trump supporter's pov, Hillary is cancer. Trump is chemotherapy. Both make you vomit and get sick. But one kills cancer and allows you to repair the wounds. In spite of the 99.5% anti-Trump atmosphere in this thread...he's gained serious ground and the race is very tight. Trump as national healer? There's a new one. As for the polls you're seeing, check the Electoral College map before you order the champagne. Yeah, this site made me feel pretty safe today. And although not listed there even Fox News shows Clinton in the lead of the Electoral College which was surprising.... I mean even Carl Rove's predictions are against Trump.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,069
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 1, 2016 19:35:22 GMT -5
I have to say that the vast, vast majority of people over here in the UK -- along with both the left-leaning and right-leaning media -- are utterly dumbfounded that someone as ignorant, xenophobic, inarticulate, sexist and down right racist as Trump could have ever gotten this close to the White House. It's hard to believe that this is the same country that only 4 years ago re-elected Barack Obama, who, regardless of what you think of his homeland policies, has been a superb ambassador for the U.S. overseas -- something that the U.S. badly needed, might I add. It seems like such a head scratcher to many of us over here. I mean, sure, we do have our own outspokenly ignorant, xenophobic, sexist politicians, but they're mostly confined to the right-wing, populist party UKIP. That party have garnered a fair bit of public support in recent years (so, we as a nation, do understand the appeal of populist politics), but, while a lot of what UKIP spouts is unrealistic, isolationist drivel, actually, having UKIP representatives in the House of Commons and the House of Lords works quite well to flavour the overall soup of British democracy. But someone like UKIP's Nigel Farage would never come close to becoming the Prime Minister, in the way that Trump has come so close to being President. Now, I realise that Clinton is hardly whiter than white (and plenty of folks I've spoken to feel truly sorry for the Americans, having to essentially pick the least offensive turd out of the toilet bowl), but come on...Trump as president would be an utter disaster, both in terms of America at home and foreign policy abroad. He's an empty vessel making the most noise -- big on rhetoric and sloganeering, but mighty short on how he's going to actually deliver any of the things he promises. He is a dangerous, dangerous man and the feeling "on the street" over here (if I may be permitted to speak on behalf of the nation) is that if he becomes president, World War III won't be far behind. Personally speaking, if Trump does win the election, it will be a real "stop the world, I wanna get off" moment for me. Completely disagree of course. But if the UK you speak of does abhor Trump the way you do, it's free not to associate with the USA anymore if he wins as a mark of protest...and I seriously doubt it will do that. Actually, when Trump made his ridiculous and idiotic remarks about not allowing Muslims to enter the U.S. should he become President, London's new Mayor, Sadiq Kahn, noted that such a ban would exclude Muslim politicians like him from visiting the U.S. on official business. When Trump responded that he would make an exception for Mr. Kahn, he quite rightly told him to go f**k himself (not in so many words, obviously). So, there are already some political figures here questioning whether they should associate with a Trump Presidency. Of course, we British would still put a brave face on it and try to make the best of things, but simply saying "if you don't like the President, don't associate with the U.S." is not really how world politics is supposed to work. America needs all the friends it can get, internationally speaking. The isolationist agenda that Trump is pushing would do lasting, long-term damage to the country. Actually, on a somewhat related note, I have a question for you, Jez, and I'm genuinely curious about your answer. I know that you're politically very right-wing, which is perfectly fine and totally your choice, of course, and I also gather that you're also a big supporter of Trump. However, even as a supporter of his, you must surely concede that he is, at heart, a racist. I mean, there is ample evidence of this, what with his proposed ban on Muslims entering America, the notorious idea of building a Mexican border wall, his attack on the parents of that Muslim U.S. Army officer some months back, his failure to express disapproval over the white supremicist organisations that support him etc, etc. Does it not trouble you that you would be voting such a racist man into a position of power? A position from which he could make life really unpleasant for a lot of non-white people? I ask because an awful lot of grass root Republicans are uncomfortable with what Trump says, so I wonder if his supporters are too. I guess I'm asking if there's any hesitation underlying your intention to vote for him?
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Nov 1, 2016 19:58:23 GMT -5
They are not "oversized French fries known as "chips". They're called " Freedom Fries," champ. And you're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Nov 1, 2016 20:06:30 GMT -5
The British were so proud of their fish 'n chips they served them wrapped in old newspapers. Or maybe that was the way to be disrespectful to The Sun? I'm still trying to figure out the ketchup vs catsup controversy
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Nov 1, 2016 20:09:36 GMT -5
I'm still trying to figure out the ketchup vs catsup controversy Can't help you; I'm stuck on "optimum" vs. "optimal."
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Nov 1, 2016 20:12:39 GMT -5
I'd actually like to know, Jez, how any woman can support Trump when he's so clearly a misogynist... you don't think that will color his governance any?
|
|