Any republicans/anti-conservatives in?

Davis isn't exactly PM. Thatcher had to have elocution lessons and put on a posh phoney voice, Major probably appealed to certain working class tories and hence they got more votes of those people. I dunno, but there's nothing that could be described as egalitarianism. I'm talking about the level of importance/self-importance and formality, protocol and pomp related to English establishment, which is literally unrivalled across Europe and in the USA, where it is more wealth based and a californian sounds californian, a bostonian sounds bostonian, etc. In Britain a man representing the North East in a rural conservative seat will speak in plummy RP and in a patrician tone that knows whats best. Even over the whole Snowdonm thing in the US, at least there was soul searching and self-examination, we just have the same public schoolboys wheeled out to be deferred to. I think English people are fooling themselves, particularly those of the most conservative persuasion, to think there are not significant differences for the worse between us and the USA and the continent. It's almost like they still believe everythig about the way we do things is the key to why we are different and better in spite of the fact we no longer are, and even where it appears great there is a lot of deceit going on, the belief in the integrity and honesty above other nations is mad.
My persepctive is that if you are hardline freemarketer or neo liberal or social conservative, then the US is a better model, and if you're a social democrat then Eruope is.

But the myth is our superiority and the problem our unwillingness to chnage. You may see as cursory acts, such things as removing the monarchy, but it isn't .It looms so large in the deferential psyche of Britian, it would be a domino effect and show people what else could change, and change their conception of themselves. Society comes down to inequality/inequality, educationala nd economic,

but if we got rid of monarchy and people were citizens not subjects,

that could precipitate a lot of good changes in the people.

I would re-iterate that just the obsession over minute detail and unwillingness to overthrow anything, as the French and Americans did, is indicative of a tedious nature to English people, and whilst the Irish and Scots went to build America, and the French had their revolution and helped the yanks kick us out, I can't help feeling we are a bit lame, and self-satisfied.

I think your knowledge and understanding of American and European politics is extremely half-baked. These issues prevail in America just as much as here. Rural Pennsylvanians are mocked as ignorant country bumpkins. New Jersey is the Essex of the United States. And everybody hates the South, which is a popular place to ridicule. In France, Paris hates everyone and everyone hates Paris.








Yes, and you know what? America's revolution was at its heart a very, very conservative and aristocratic one. They preserved as much as possible of the British system and did away with what they didn't like. In fact, their repudiation of the monarchy was a very conservative decision. Britain had been evolving since the 1660s into a parliamentary state, where the powers of the Crown were exercised by someone in Parliament. America's Founding Fathers objected to that as dangerous, and so formally re-established the old, medieval idea of a formal separation of powers, and made the Executive an elected office to bypass the danger of the Executive being beholden to the Legislature..

I





Yes, and you know what? America's revolution was at its heart a very, very conservative and aristocratic one. They preserved as much as possible of the British system and did away with what they didn't like. In fact, their repudiation of the monarchy was a very conservative decision. Britain had been evolving since the 1660s into a parliamentary state, where the powers of the Crown were exercised by someone in Parliament. America's Founding Fathers objected to that as dangerous, and so formally re-established the old, medieval idea of a formal separation of powers, and made the Executive an elected office to bypass the danger of the Executive being beholden to the Legislature.

.

Well obviously I'm not opposing conservatism in a blanket sense. It's entirely valid when you are attempting to preserve something worth preserving and oppose a harmful change. Maybe Irish republicans would end up with a marginally more religious/conservative country than England in one sense, the Americans have strong strand of social conservatism, but they still do oppose thing which I also profoundly oppose, and it is true that the level of class discrimination independent of wealth is pronounced here, to a degree that is alien to scots, Irish, americans and aussies. It's the form of conservatism that England has. It's the fact that I can go to other countries and be so much happier in them, that I feel alien in my own country, that it still reveres snobbery and cap doffing, and lacks humanity.

Mate, I've just got savvy. It's about thinking bigger. I'm entirely aware of the above factors in those countries. I'm not painting them as utopias, i'm just saying they are different, and I differ from conservatives in that if we were to remove much of how we differ from both continental europeans and Americans, remaining distinct only in the sense of geography from which our individuality would flourish within a globalised context and within the power blocks of Europe, operating alongside the USA, i'd be happier.

You're really proving my point by how you argue and think. You're a typical conservative. Well infomed and educated about minutuae and thinking of every justification possible for why change must be opposed(that's lready your starting point-skepticism, and what could go wrong if change occured) even though there's no reason to fear it or believe that it would bring anything worse, no reason to believe taking a chan ce isn't worth it, and certainly no reason to believe we have something as unique and special and not needing change as conservatives beleive.

Again, I think we are living off the past(just look at TV for god's sake, they are obsessed with the past and not the future),

not willig to recognise these changes as what they could be in relations to our reduced status in the world, and how they'd represent us joining our continental and American friends more

And the class system is different in England, Orwell himself commented on it, many continentals and particularly Americans have been incredulous at it.

If you have more conservative or more social liberal politics, that's more a question of American or European politics, not p[reserving instituions which aren't wotrking as well as you believe.

Like I say, indoctrination happens in America nd France, so why not to conservatives here. And they do laugh at us in Germany and France, and many Americans like Scots, Irish , Europe and hate us, you can look it up.

I can only repeat that this is nothing more than your own perception. .

We could argue all day. I'll point you to this excellent article from someone who can articulate my point far better than me.

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/will-self-abolish-monarchy-republicanism/

“Does the institution do anyone any harm?”. For those that do think the Queen is a demon, a standard bearer for all that ails our nation, a bastion of class distinction and down treader of the masses, I suggest go look in the mirror and ask “What did I do for Britain today?” If you think the question’s daft take the mirror down.

Davis isn't exactly PM. Thatcher had to have elocution lessons and put on a posh phoney voice, Major probably appealed to certain working class tories and hence they got more votes of those people. I dunno, but there's nothing that could be described as egalitarianism.

I'm talking about the level of importance/self-importance and formality, protocol and pomp related to English establishment, which is literally unrivalled across Europe and in the USA, where it is more wealth based and a californian sounds californian, a bostonian sounds bostonian, etc. In Britain a man representing the North East in a rural conservative seat will speak in plummy RP and in a patrician tone that knows whats best.

Even over the whole Snowdonm thing in the US, at least there was soul searching and self-examination, we just have the same public schoolboys wheeled out to be deferred to.

I think English people are fooling themselves, particularly those of the most conservative persuasion, to think there are not significant differences for the worse between us and the USA and the continent. It's almost like they still believe everythig about the way we do things is the key to why we are different and better in spite of the fact we no longer are, and even where it appears great there is a lot of deceit going on, the belief in the integrity and honesty above other nations is mad.

My persepctive is that if you are hardline freemarketer or neo liberal or social conservative, then the US is a better model, and if you're a social democrat then Eruope is.

But the myth is our superiority and the problem our unwillingness to chnage.

You may see as cursory acts, such things as removing the monarchy, but it isn't .It looms so large in the deferential psyche of Britian, it would be a domino effect and show people what else could change, and change their conception of themselves.

Society comes down to inequality/inequality, educationala nd economic, but if we got rid of monarchy and people were citizens not subjects, that could precipitate a lot of good changes in the people.

I would re-iterate that just the obsession over minute detail and unwillingness to overthrow anything, as the French and Americans did, is indicative of a tedious nature to English people, and whilst the Irish and Scots went to build America, and the French had their revolution and helped the yanks kick us out, I can't help feeling we are a bit lame, and self-satisfied.