Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: danielmryan

Daniel,
There is little need to guess. If you click on someone’s screen name, you will go to their page.

I am an Anglophile and more supportive of the shared histor of Anglo-America than most WASPs I know. I went to a British styled preparatory school. At one time I knew all the English monarchs from Alfred to Elizabeth II by heart. I write not as someone who dislikes Britain or the monarchy, but as someone horrified by the subjugation of the Sceptered Isle.

As an American, I support the British Freedom Party. Were I British, I would likely join UKIP. The Libertarian Alliance is not a party.

If deference has brought colonization of your cities, Muslim rape gangs, bowing to Brussels, and curtsying before politically correct commissars, then patriotism demands rebellion. Either stand up when your children are second-class subjects of a nominal country they still run electorally, or watch their children become second-class hated minorities in a backwater province.

And, yes, I know I may as well be speaking martian as far as most British are concerned.
Of course, we are little better off in America.


27 posted on 06/05/2012 10:55:29 PM PDT by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: rmlew
You'd be pegged as talking "martian" (i.e., American) because most Brits don't really see the need. There's a lot less deference in the U.K. than meets the outside eye. Typically, "guv'ner" is used when the deferrer wants something.

It's particularly true when the "guv'ner" is a commoner like the petitioner. Even if you're solid gentry, you're likely to be pegged as a fop or upper-class twit. Just as with Americans and my fellow Canadians, coming from a privileged background means having something extra to live down. It's a way of making the playing field more level.

True, the Brits aren't much for protests and standing up politically, but that's because they rely on more informal means. A Brit just quietly breaks the law when no-one's looking and trusts his mates to back him up. Any mate that doesn't know how to keep his mouth shut or dissimulate gets a warning with his second chance or the boot. It's not very stirring, but it works well enough.

The long-term goal is to wear down the authorities, to make them throw up their hands and not bother to enforce the disliked law or rule. Eventually, so it's hoped by the afflicted, said law or rule will become little more than a dead letter. As I said, it's not that stirring but it does work.

Nice to hear that you're an Anglophile of long standing. Myself, I'm only a recent convert: Americophilia was more attractive to me when younger. One benefit to being an Anglophile is picking up the political mode of thought there. Brits ingest "cui bono?" with their mother's milk. An unreconstructed Brit will peg:

And best of all, they tend to meet any resultant umbrage with disdain, condescension, a stiff upper lip or mirth.

Also, they keep ideologues underfoot by treating such as mere theoreticians. This practice has the benefit of keeping mainstream ideologues underfoot as well.

But still, the class system is a lot more rigid in the U.K. and it's also more constricting. An American can always resort to "li'l old me," but a high-up Brit can't. It's an enormous advantage you Americans have over the Britons.

Congrats on securing the benefits of a more rigourous education.

30 posted on 06/06/2012 6:44:13 PM PDT by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson