Author Topic: Th course of British Society in the future  (Read 4758 times)

Offline Laurie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #180 on: July 07, 2007, 02:35:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001


hardly "wiped out"


hardly flourished either.

Offline Hazzer

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 290
      • Fleetwood town F.C. Cod Army
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #181 on: July 07, 2007, 06:28:21 AM »
I hate the pc brigade.I distrust all politicians.I believe in live and let live,and hate injustice.

  By the way,Anyone born in the United States is "NATIVE",the red Indian tribes are "INDIGENOUS". :aok
"I murmured that I had no Shoes,till I met a man that had no Feet."

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #182 on: July 07, 2007, 08:45:14 AM »
thank you hazzer.. like here... brit education must have been better back when you went to school than it is now that laurie is going...  

The indigenous indians here were slaughtering each other when we got here..  

They either claimed they had the right to sell the land or... that there was no owner... we played by their rules...  they lost because they weren't advanced enough to slaughter us as well as they slaughtered each other.   Sorta like the reason my people lost to the brits.

Truth is..  people need to assimilate into the country they live in..  otherwise... why not just stay at the craphole they just left?   What we have here is blacks who don't try.   some do tho and do very well.   we have illegals from our southern border.. people who broke our laws in order to get here and grab all they can no matter what laws they break.    They don't even bother to learn the language.  I see no percentage in allowing that.

In france they have ghettos where there is no assimilation at all of muslims..It is that way in many your-0-peean countries.

lazs

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #183 on: July 07, 2007, 08:47:03 AM »
There is Indian ancestry on both sides of my family Laurie.  The news of our extermination has been greatly exaggerated.


If we are going to discuss all the evils done in the past by one ethnic group against another, then perhaps it is only fair to bring up the depredations of Hengist and Horsa, and of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes forcing the "indigenous" Celts of Britain onto the wilder and less hospitable lands of Wales, Ireland and Scotland, after a long period of warfare and wholesale slaughter.  

Or of the Scouring of northern England by William the Conqueror that left so many Anglo-Norse residents dead and starving that it took a full century for the population to recover.

Or of the many centuries of warfare waged against the Scots by English monarchs, or of invasions of Scotland that left the land devastated and hundreds of thousands dead of conflict and starvation.

Or of the invasion of Ireland by Norman monarchs and the seizure of Irish lands which were taken over by English landlords.  And of how the English government showed very little concern for the starving masses of Irish tenant farms during the infamous Potato Famine.

Every country has these types of skeletons in their closets.

Regards, Shuckins

Offline Laurie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #184 on: July 07, 2007, 10:29:16 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
thank you hazzer.. like here... brit education must have been better back when you went to school than it is now that laurie is going...  

The indigenous indians here were slaughtering each other when we got here..  


We do not learn about the indigenous people of the Americas at Eaton or Harrow, there are much more pressing educational issues at hand.

I was just going on a basic knowledge and recoloction of conversations, and i am open to this new information on the topic which some of you have given, and I am taking it onboard,

BUT this still does not change the fact that just 3 centuries ago The Native people were American Indians and that the white european was just an un-welcome tresspasser..... does it?

Offline Laurie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #185 on: July 07, 2007, 10:59:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Shuckins
There is Indian ancestry on both sides of my family Laurie.  The news of our extermination has been greatly exaggerated.


If we are going to discuss all the evils done in the past by one ethnic group against another, then perhaps it is only fair to bring up the depredations of Hengist and Horsa, and of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes forcing the "indigenous" Celts of Britain onto the wilder and less hospitable lands of Wales, Ireland and Scotland, after a long period of warfare and wholesale slaughter.  

1200 years ago, approx.



Or of the Scouring of northern England by William the Conqueror that left so many Anglo-Norse residents dead and starving that it took a full century for the population to recover.

950 years ago

Or of the many centuries of warfare waged against the Scots by English monarchs, or of invasions of Scotland that left the land devastated and hundreds of thousands dead of conflict and starvation.

Buff up on your history, you make it sound as  if the Scots were innocent, 400-700 years ago.

Or of the invasion of Ireland by Norman monarchs and the seizure of Irish lands which were taken over by English landlords.

 And of how the English government showed very little concern for the starving masses of Irish tenant farms during the infamous Potato Famine.

The Republic of Ireland ,this is a country which had tried to capture areas of our rule and tried to rebel against us, they weren't exactly in our good books, so why act so surprised that we didn't really care too much. Incidentally it was a fungus that came from North America in the holds of ships which actually caused the famine.

Every country has these types of skeletons in their closets.

If these are skeletons, the others must be corpses, no?

Regards, Shuckins [/B]

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #186 on: July 07, 2007, 11:21:28 AM »
So what you're saying is that if we go back far enough in time the depradations of our ancestors no longer count?

As far as it goes, a close study of the history of the English and the Scots would reveal that the English carried out far more invasions of Scotland than the Scots did of England.

In more modern times, I'm sure the natives of Egypt, Sudan, India, the Crimea, the Zulus of South Africa, the people of the Palestinian Mandate and Iraq welcomed their British conquerors and occupiers with open arms.

Didn't they?

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #187 on: July 07, 2007, 12:04:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Laurie
We do not learn about the indigenous people of the Americas at Eaton or Harrow,


You have made that abundantly clear, however you continue to spew incorrect information about the subject.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Whisky58

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 289
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #188 on: July 07, 2007, 12:09:59 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Shuckins


As far as it goes, a close study of the history of the English and the Scots would reveal that the English carried out far more invasions of Scotland than the Scots did of England.

Yes, but the Scots deserved it because they were in league with the French for much of the time.

In more modern times, I'm sure the natives of Egypt, Sudan, India, the Crimea, the Zulus of South Africa, the people of the Palestinian Mandate and Iraq welcomed their British conquerors and occupiers with open arms.

Didn't they?


No. But if we get right up to date there are 53 countries in the Commonwealth (1.8 billion people) of which 52 are ex-British Empire.  These countries are proud of their historical links with Britain.

Regards
Whisky

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #189 on: July 07, 2007, 02:08:15 PM »
Whiskey,

Who inserted the statement into my post about the Scots deserving it? I'm certain that they have a different take on the matter. :D

While the British Empire was undoubtedly one of the most benevolent in world history, it was nonetheless an empire, which cannot be established without wars, bloodshed, conquest, and occupation, which are deeply resented at the time they take place.

Time has a way of healing old wounds.  It may be true that many of the nations that were once part of the Empire or Commonwealth may be proud of that association.  Certainly I've seen evidence of it myself.  While spending a summer in Cairo, my student group and I were riding a bus when we heard the wierd, skirling strains of bagpipes.  An Egyptian army band was marching through the streets playing these reminders of British occupation and rule.

This is the sort of thing that tickles the British fancy, and makes them wax reminiscent about the benefits of British civilization which was spread across the globe by the Empire.

But if you pinned these former British subjects down on the matter, they would probably tell you that they are glad the British are gone, and probably don't want you to come back.

Regards, Shuckins

Offline Whisky58

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 289
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #190 on: July 07, 2007, 03:20:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Shuckins
There is Indian ancestry on both sides of my family Laurie.  The news of our extermination has been greatly exaggerated.


If we are going to discuss all the evils done in the past by one ethnic group against another, then perhaps it is only fair to bring up the depredations of Hengist and Horsa, and of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes forcing the "indigenous" Celts of Britain onto the wilder and less hospitable lands of Wales, Ireland and Scotland, after a long period of warfare and wholesale slaughter.

Regards, Shuckins


Nice post Shuckins, including the bit I deleted. Just a couple of points tho'.

By the time the Germanic tribes arrived in England (and it was mostly England that they came to), the population was strictly speaking "Romano-British" and had been for 450 years since the Roman invasion & occupation.  Many Romans settled in Britain & became "British" and many Brits became Romanised as the two cultures merged. When the Roman armies (made up largely by northern european mercenaries) were forced to leave as a result of Vandals & Goths threatening Rome the British pleaded with them not to go, fearing raids from hostile Scandinavian & Germanic tribes.  The Angles were initially invited to Britain as mercenaries to protect the indigenous population, but got a bit out of hand! It was the Romans who displaced the "Celts", not the Germanic tribes. In fact it was probably less of a displacement and more an integration. The less hospitable lands were already occupied by Celtic speaking tribes who were just left alone by the Romans. Hadrian's and Antonine walls were built to keep the Picts & the Scots out. The lowlands of Scotland to the north of Hadrian's wall is a very pleasant and fertile place to live.

The concept of the "Celts" as a race or tribe is a myth. More accurately it describes a diverse variety of races and cultures who spoke "Celtic" languages derived from an Indo-European Celtic root, whose origins were  from the birthplace of agriculture - the Middle East, what is now Iraq & Iran. These Celtic speakers moved west and displaced or integrated with the ancient Brits a few thousand years ago - nobody is exactly sure when. When the Romans arrived in Britain they found it occupied by a mixed bag of Celtic speaking tribes who spent much of their time fighting each other. None of the British tribes described themselves as Celts. The story of notable local resistance and revolt against the Romans by Boudicca and the Icenae tribe is a catalogue of inter tribal treachery and betrayal. The popular modern image of the Celts being some sort of romantic, pastural, musical, spiritual unified race in touch with nature is nonsense.
The Celt myth was largely invented by a guy called Edward Lhuyd at the beginning of the 18th century. He was a Welsh patriot who resented English dominance and wanted to give Wales it's own history separate from England's. He claimed that the Celts had been a great warrior race who dominated Europe and had terrorised the Romans, and that the Welsh were their direct descendants. These nationalistic, anti-English sentiments struck a chord in parts of Scotland and Ireland and hence the Celt myth prospered, particularly in the romantic mid and late 19th century.

Celtic languages are still spoken in west Scotland, north & central Wales, west Ireland, south-west England & north-west France, but they are all distinct and separate languages, and I hope they don't become extinct. Modern English has many words from Celtic languages.

The "Celts" were not the indigenous population of Britain.

Regards
Whisky

Offline Whisky58

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 289
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #191 on: July 07, 2007, 03:30:42 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Shuckins
Whiskey,

This is the sort of thing that tickles the British fancy, and makes them wax reminiscent about the benefits of British civilization which was spread across the globe by the Empire.

But if you pinned these former British subjects down on the matter, they would probably tell you that they are glad the British are gone, and probably don't want you to come back.

Regards, Shuckins


I think most people in Britain have a realistic grasp on the less savoury aspects of it's empire. I guess we just get a little miffed at Hollywood's interpretation. Jeez- even the bad guys in Disney all have English accents:D

You're dead right, they wouldn't want us back because then they'd all have bad teeth and be forced to watch soccer :D

Regards
Whisky

Offline Laurie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #192 on: July 07, 2007, 05:18:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Shuckins

As far as it goes, a close study of the history of the English and the Scots would reveal that the English carried out far more invasions of Scotland than the Scots did of England.

 


Well done Sherlock.

Of Course they did! the British were far stronger and powerful so they could successfully invade, weather in retaliation or for other purposes.

Saying Scotland was innocent is like saying Al qaeda is innocent and the US and British armies are big bad ogres because the extremists are much smaller in number.

Offline Whisky58

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 289
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #193 on: July 07, 2007, 06:19:49 PM »
Laurie, judging by your spelling and punctuation above, I'm assuming that you weren't educated at either Eton (no "a") or Harrow. ;) Neither were my two eldest kids, but funnily enough they both studied some American Indian history in their GCSE History curriculum.
Regards.
Whisky

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
Th course of British Society in the future
« Reply #194 on: July 07, 2007, 06:21:20 PM »
Might makes right?  

Comparing the Scots to Al Qaeda and calling them extremists isn't helping your cause.

No one claimed the Scots were blameless, but they seldom produced characters as unsavory as the Duke of Cumberland.  The nickname given to him of "Butcher" Cumberland after the Battle of Culloden was well deserved.

The repression of the Scots and their clans after that battle was extreme, and constituted an attack on the very culture of the Scots themselves.

Shall I produce more examples of British benevolence?  Don't even get me started on Britain's part in starting the infamous and odorous Opium War with China.  The massacre of the Zulus is another bright spot in English history.

If the hands of American settlers and their government are covered in the blood of native Americans, then the British are covered in it up to their necks.

My apologies to any British posters here, like Whiskey, who care to argue their points with respect for those holding opposing viewpoints.