h a l f b a k e r yWe got your practicality ... right here.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
The culture of the English which is celebrated by the UK’s political class as Britishness – is narrow-minded, class-ridden, fearful, smug and ill-informed. This is not a good basis for culture, or for getting on in the world. It is the sort of culture that permits the rise of UKIP and the parallel
descent of the remainder of the political class into something akin to a bucket filled almost but not quite to the brim with etiolated newts, whole newt dynasties bred, rising and falling, in this bucket, knowing only the bucket, climbing and slithering over and under and over one another until they die, sink and turn to mulch.
For the good of England, this needs to be fixed. Fixing this is not easy but there is a way.
I subscribe, somewhere between whole- and half-heartedly, to the theory that a culture is in part shaped by the physical geography in which the culture arises. I subscribe to the parallel notion that where the physical geography of an area is generally conducive to comfortable living that the culture in that area is more greatly influenced by political geography. The case in point is the culture of the English, which comes from and is supported by (a) a long and proud history of being not physically joined to the landmass containing her political rivals and (b) being large and fertile and generally quite hospitable terrain. To fix the English, we must fix England. We must fix her by making her smaller, by sinking everything outside of the M25 into the sea. This will allow London and its immediate surrounds to continue as a kind of European Singapore, financially important but politically irrelevant. This approach has the advantage that people in London will not notice.
What this will do is complete the alignment of London’s self-interest with England’s self-interest, which is politically already in train, while increasing London-England’s dependence on other countries for everything other than waterfront property. England, then, in a few generations, will become as Hong Kong, a bastion of capitalist co-operation with its neighbours and / or suppliers. A necessarily more tolerant and open-minded culture will flourish.
The alternative plan would be to sink London into the ground, which would have a more positive effect on English culture but the markets are for some reason skittish about this.
'Dogger' by Shirley Hughes
https://en.wikipedi.../wiki/Dogger_(book)
Apropos [bs0u0155]'s comment. I looked it up so you don't have to! [DrBob, May 13 2024]
[link]
|
| |
// narrow-minded, class-ridden, fearful, smug and ill-informed. // |
|
| |
We'll vote for that. Like we always have done' dontcherknow. |
|
| |
// This is not a good basis for culture, or for getting on in the world. // |
|
| |
It worked perfectly well between 1550 and 1950. Had a nice little
Empire, then the socialists gave it away ... |
|
| |
// It is the sort of culture that permits the rise of UKIP // |
|
| |
You say that like it's somehow a bad thing ... |
|
| |
// and the parallel descent of the remainder of the political class into
something akin to a bucket filled almost but not quite to the brim with
etiolated newts, whole newt dynasties bred, rising and falling, in this
bucket, knowing only the bucket, climbing and slithering over and
under and over one another until they die, sink and turn to mulch.// |
|
| |
^ THIS COMMENT IS PEJORATIVE, SPECIESIST, AND DISRESPECTS
NEWTS. |
|
| |
// For the good of England, // |
|
| |
And, by inference, the rest of the planet ... |
|
| |
// this needs to be fixed. Fixing this is not easy but there is a way.// |
|
| |
Ahhh, [calum] has seen the light. OK, your job is to kneel on the right
of the Vickers gun, and feed the belts in ... |
|
| |
// The alternative plan would be to sink London into the ground, // |
|
| |
You seem to have become confused. That IS Plan "A". There is no
Plan "B". |
|
| |
// which would have a more positive effect on English culture // |
|
| |
No, because there is no "English" culture in London ( or indeed culture
of any sort, except plague bacteria), nor has there been for some
considerable time. |
|
| |
// but the markets are for some reason skittish about this. // |
|
| |
This is very odd. We were planning quite the
reverse. |
|
| |
It turns out that Wales has lots of hills. By levelling
these off and moving the spoil to the eastern side of
England, we can not only make Wales habitable (or at
least largely horizontal), but we can also fill in most
of that shallow water to the east, thereby creating
extra space for a conservatory. |
|
| |
The Doggerland conservatory could be opened by Shirley
Hughes if she's still capable. |
|
| |
Indeed; a rather less ugly image than we had feared, given the context. |
|
| |
What an ironically appropriate word for something that originates in wales ... |
|
| |
Litter England = Drop your trash anywhere you like. |
|
| |
I think the main issue here is the deeply non vocal nature
of much of what is "Englishness". Unfortunately this
means that while Jeremy Clarkson and other oafish types
bound about having opinions for money, lots of real
Englishness remains ensconced behind closed doors. |
|
| |
If I had one amendment to put to the idea as posted, it
would be to make available some form of floatation
platform/device that could be government-issued to each
Englishman's shed, allowing it to be lifted clear of the
coming floodwaters and carry afloat the last dying
remnants of English pipe-smoking, Grandad trouser-
wearing, wood and metal working "touche-à-tout" boat
people - These folk might form the stock for a new
diaspora - and plant new little seeds of England around
the world in a long overdue resurgence of culture-in-
practice that has since become overlooked. |
|
| |
Meanwhile, is it settled which new political division of England will be handling the geopolitical relations now? You've been curiously absent from quite a number of recent international vexations, even going so far as to letting the French take the lead in dealings with Russia as of late, with predictable results. Have you gone all Neville Chamberlain on us? |
|
| |
Englishness as experienced in English is yes deeply non-vocal (primarily because it is flags). Englishness as export is necessarily vocal. Intra-shire Englishness is AOK with me - it affects only English people and people who by and large have chosen to come to England - extra-national Englishness is the problem, and Clarkson is part of it: the English as experienced by people outside of England is in broad terms, horrible and petty and it is only through a literal flooding of the non-capital hinterland that a more internationally-palatable Englisness can come to pass. |
|
| |
I am, however, on board with the idea of the displaced peoples of non-London-England forming an allotment armada, bobbing in the currents, washing up in the Azores at first, then across the Atlantic to have a second, less militarily inclined crack at the Caribbean, the English this time in the role of huddled masses, seeing now how they like being yanked from the warm sea and thrown into makeshift detention centres. |
|
| |
There is a parallel here with what Rupe Murdoch did with the News of the World: this is a public relations exercise, a notional destruction of a cancerous organ, replaced after a less than seemly period with a rough equivalent. Englishness gets a rebrand without any underlying change or improvement. |
|
| |
I know, right! Of the many things I got wrong, the biggest was not realising that it would be the non-capital hinterland that'd pre-emptively scuttle the ship like the pirates who spotted Asterix & Obelix off the port bow. |
|
| |
touché (or at least it would have been if it had come after the other) ;D |
|
| |
// Englishness gets a rebrand without any ... improvement. // |
|
| |
Tautology - Englishness cannot be improved. |
|
| |
// pre-emptively scuttle the ship like the pirates who spotted Asterix & Obelix off the port bow // |
|
| |
a nice analogy & actually quite complimentary in a way to the English (surprising that), in doing so they only got wet instead of receiving yet another beating & then getting wet so it was the intelligent move ;D |
|
| |
was this a deliberate yet subtle compliment [calum] or didn't you see it that way? |
|
| |
//Englishness cannot be improved.// |
|
| |
Oh? That's sad. Try the new turd-polisher 3000! |
|
| |
// Try the new turd-polisher 3000! // |
|
| |
Thanks for the offer, but it looks like the Democrats have pre-ordered the entire production - until November, anyway. |
|
| |
I am surprised that I hadn't noticed this idea before. It seems right up my alley (ooh, Mrs!).
What is or is not Englishness is, I think, both a generational & a regional thing. For me, Englishness is mostly about just getting on with your life & then going down the pub to chat with your mates & tut-tut at things you disapprove of. Whilst the legacy of Empire & slavery doesn't play too well abroad, in England it is mainly about curries & not being too surprised when you discover that your next door neighbour can't speak English (especially if they are from north of Watford Gap) but being curious, verging on nosey, about what they get up to. Clarkson is almost the antithesis of Englishness. A bad, tabloid-inspired caricature of the loud-mouthed, racist, thug abroad image that many people have of the English. Having said that, I live in a strongly multi-cultural & artistic city where difference is hardly remarked upon no matter how bizarre it might seem. 50 miles down the road, my mum's family live in a deeply racist area, where anybody whose skin colour is anything different to pale & pastey (except during the summer, when lobster red is the acceptable norm) is likely to have their house burnt down in the middle of the night. And a lot of what passes amongst the youth of today as English culture is actually a caricature of US culture, innit?
But regardless, whatever Englishness is, you won't find it in London.
However, flooding London in an attempt to wash away the troublesome cultural elements will fail because they all live in Surrey & Berkshire & up the Thames Valley. None of them would be so gauche as to actually live in London. That's something that only poor people & foreign billionaires do.
PS: I do miss 8th & Max. Reading their annos made me smile & be sad at the same time. |
|
| |
// I do miss 8th & Max. Reading their annos made me smile & be sad at the same time.// - I felt the same, re-reading this.
It is curious how, over time, London is steadily diverging from England. I think it is partly to do with how anomalous London is when considered next to other English cities. Most countries have several large cities and a lot of small cities. England has one huge city and nothing else that even comes close in terms of population or wealth. It's weird in other respects too, like having usable public transport.
And if you haven't seen [bs0u0155]'s very good 'Doggerland' joke, scroll up a bit |
|
| |
My thinking has evolved in the 9 years since posting this:
1. I no longer consider London as worthy of special treatment. This is in large part due to me spending time in London.
2. I more strongly hold the conviction that geography shapes culture, and so making the English landscape less amenable to human habitation would likely, in time, after a period of Threads-like barbarity, prove to inculcate a generosity of spirit currently absent from the English character.
3. This is not a political or nationalist endeavour: those parts of the world which are temperamentally English (specifically: Edinburgh) will also be flooded; those parts of England which are not temperamentally English (specifically: Liverpool) will not be flooded. |
|
| |
//It is curious how, over time, London is steadily diverging from England. I think it is partly to do with how anomalous London is when considered next to other English cities.//
The difference between England and London is presumably more apparent to English people and Londoners. From both the distant remove of my wind-blasted croft and from smell-the-locals close experiences of Englanders and Londoners in their natural habitats (viz. Moorgate Tube Station, Somerset, Leeds, certain parts of Northern Ireland), it's hard to see much functional difference. Everyone is fucking miserable and on a mission to make sure everyone is as fucking miserable as they are. If, as I propose, we make the landscape miserable (how about if not flooding then at least more Scottish), then the people will have no choice but to be nicer. That's the plan anyway. |
|
| |
//I more strongly hold the conviction that geography shapes culture// Then, to foster harmony and common understanding among the peoples of the world, surely the answer is for populations to rotate around countries every year? Moving to a country with a very different geography will smooth out the awkward bits of your own cultural heritage* as well as encouraging a common worldwide understanding of problems we collectively face; For example climate change will become a little more real if you have to be a citizen of the Maldives for a year.
[* unless you're one of those British people who lives in Spain for decades without learning a word of Spanish] |
|
| |
[Obligatory 8th of 7 Memorial Anno]
I thought that that was what the British Empire was all about. Sending lots of educated, but culturally challenged, Englishmen overseas (along with their large staff of eager assistants employed from the lower classes, all helpfully decked out in lovely red uniforms for ease of identification) to broaden their horizons, learn some foreign customs & lingo & bring home lots of souvenirs of their visit.
And certainly, as per hippo's suggestion, we rotated large numbers of people around the globe so that they could go & do volunteer work in strange, new countries. In fact, so popular & successful was this arrangement that most of the participants never went home again. |
|
| |