Who's More British...
 

The Aussies or the Americans?












you're gonna say the Aussies. I know it. But WHY?

Cuz, it's an insult right? ;)

Maybe it's because they have an accent?
Maybe it's because we're 'Mercans and we like to think we are completely original and unique?

Because they belong to the empire... uh, commonwealth.

http://www.merdurian.com/wp-content/...07/12/flag.JPG

Oz

because the USA threw off the yoke of the oppressor centuries ago!

Because the former British poopulation exported to Australia has undergone far less dilution by other nationalities over the years, and it shows.

:: intentionally quiet ::

Because:
...there isn't the big gun divide.
...they have more of our TV than America.
...their right-wing/ conservative/ Christian fundamentalists don't have as loud a voice (i.e. a nipple on Australian television wouldn't cause a furore)
...they have a welfare state
...they understand how to queue ;)

Those who came to America from England in the years leading up to 1776 did so voluntarily. The US then declared independence and actively fought to separate from England. So they certainly had reasons to disdain all things British.

The Australian transportees were forced out, and presumably would have stayed in England if they had been able to. So while they can't have been happy with the mother country, maybe they would have less of a chip on their shoulder to prove to each other how un-British they were.

Except
1) the Protestant fathers who were forced to leave England in order to have the freedom to practice their religion; and
2) the Scottish crofters who were forced to leave their homes and often their native land by English landowners to make way for sheep-farming (I concede a lot of these went to Canada, and after 1776 ...)

Well taken. My point was that the population wasn't made up entirely, or almost entirely, of convicted criminals.

Who's more British, Dana or Sundae Girl?

plenty of Brits came to the colonies early on as indentured servants though--not sure if you can call that exactly voluntary

Why are you asking anyway, Brianna?

and so, -- what's the answer? LOL!

transporting was a punishment just shy of hanging in england in the 1600's. you were exiled to the colonies. against your will. if you survived the voyage, you had 7 years of pseudo slavery to look forward to until you were freed. if you returned to england, and got caught, you got hanged immediately.

And to be fair, they hanged you for pretty much anything in those days.
Deterrent apparently.

Well, reality shows and alcopops hadn't been invented - they had to amuse the mob somehow.

Australians aren't British, they're Australian.

We will be a republic before long, but achieve it peacefully in about the same amount of time it took the yanks to do it violently. (around 200 years from settlement)

Some of you have some grave misconceptions about Australia. I suggest you read your history books.

Read The Fatal Shore by Robert Hughes. An amazing book!

Not entirely, a lot of people saw it as a new chance and stowed away or bribed captains to get travel to Australia.

Also, you will find the majority of convicts had NO desire to return to England once freed. If families were involved, there was much effort put into getting them to our shores...rather than the new Australian trying to get back to the mother land.

The same can be said regarding misconceptions about the US.

I am proud of our (and my) British heritage, its whats started us on the journey to the Country we are today.

Ali, you know I love you, but comments like those, with that tone...are what gets *the Yanks* backs up.

I'm not in favour of us becoming a republic...doesnt seem to have worked out for the majority of countries who have been down that track.

Besides, then we wont be able to totally kick arse in the Commonwealth games.

Oh, and I think Bri is more British than Aussies.

Who's more British?
;)



Dana or Sundae?

I don't really care if they get their backs up mate. Obviously they make their own decisions based on what they think is true. Besides, being called a Yank is an affectionate term. :) Ask any Aussie (Australian for those who want to be politically correct or not use affectionate terms), and as far as independance from England goes, they did do it violently (with the help of the French whom are so much maligned these days), so that was a statement of fact.

As far as I can see, it doesn't matter either way if we're a republic or not. The only difference either way is the commonwealth games, and there's still the Olympics anyway (which we kick arse at too if you look at our medals per capita).

Australia is the way it is BECAUSE we were settled by convicts and free settlers. That's what makes us great. We began from the downtrodden underclass and a collective vow has been unconsiously taken by all of us to never be treated like second class citizens by the world at large. We are a young nation and we're proud and free. We have achieved marvels of science and technology. We have a lifestyle most countries envy. We are a nation of people of all colours, creeds, religions. We are truly multicultural and that's as it should be. Australians are citizens of the world and we are all equal.

There's nothing wrong with England. I don't resent my heritage from there, but I'm an Australian. I'm not British. I, like all other Australians have my own unique Australian identity which is far removed from that which most Brits would identify with.

So to answer the original question of this thread, I don't think there's any difference. Where you start from is rarely the same place you end up. It's very hard to look forward if your head is turned in the opposite direction.

(waves at Ali!)

Wow.

This was just for funsies.



sighs.

You should know better by now. :D

Yeah, you'd think so. ;)

If it reads like a novel I think I will. I've been looking for a good historical. Thanks :)



There were British and French colonies wanting this land too. I know they had bigger muskets. Sometimes the colonists didn't even have a proper weapon. After all the old Revere saying goes, " To arms, to arms." " The British are comming!." "The British are comming"


[excerpt]
King George III had said, "blows must decide whether they are to be subject to this country or independent." He commanded English General Thomas Gage to use force to restore royal authority.
http://www.riverdeep.net/current/200..._history.jhtml



See we never hit first. :P

I must say that's largely what I've always thought.

Some of the things one reads about treatment of the aborigine population and their culture make me question this bit, but I'm happy to be corrected. I'll also be the first to say the British can be appalling racists.

[ahem]

but...but...limey!!! I thought you were a Scot!

If you say you're British, didn't William Wallace do all that for nothing?

;) :f167:

It's effed up.

England = England and Wales :)
Great Britain = England and Scotland
UK = Great Britain and N. Ireland

That took way too long for someone to take offense.
:p

Ahem
England is England
Although many laws apply to England and Wales
You also missed off the British Isles
Which is the UK plus Eire

:angel:

Australia was settled under a lie, and Aboriginal people have been treated like shit right from the start. Almost as if they didn't even exist...which would explain why the country was declared 'terra nullius' by the British. Meaning of course, no human habitation what so ever. It may surprise you that even in those times, if a new land was inhabited, the 'discovering country' was supposed to make provisions for/ask for permission to settle the country.

Times are changing now. There's quite a discussion about our recent change of government and the events of the first day of parliament if you care to look here. Times are changing. I have high hopes for the future of our country as we work towards leaving the crimes of our forefathers in the past.

You really believe a government is going to make that much difference?

I think not.

The government represents the people. I could be cynical and say they can't make a difference, but if I do that, it's like giving up on change. Giving up on a better future for all Australians, and I don't want to do that. I want to be hopeful. There is hope. We can do better than we have done in the past. All of us. But only if we are committed to change.

I am.

Are you?

Just goes to show, we may all be more alike than we want to admit -we all have our freaking loonies...... and most of us have no idea which land belongs to whom :p

I am more British than any of you.

*does best Churchill impression*

See?

Also Australians are more British than Americans, since Australians are almost exclusively made out of British ex-pats one way or another.

but there is a town/village with my last name in the UK
Cockerham

Probably the biggest difference stems from the attitude and action of the Brits, when the US and Australia were founded.

That has been the case in the past, but over the last 20 years or so, the number of citizens with mainly British racial origins has been steadily dropping, and continues to do so. According to this article, by 2025, there will be only about 60% (and dropping) of the Australian population with a British background.

Incidentally, did you know that Melbourne has the largest population in the world, of Greeks outside of Athens...and you know how those Catholics like to breed. ;)

Scots

Politicians only represent the people when its election time.

Astute.

But even then, they are representing themselves, as a champion of the voters.

There was an NPR or maybe BBC radio show recently about an incident with an aboriginal in Australia. I got the impression from the show that Australian aboriginals were discriminated against.

I live in Scotland but I am English ... in my view "British" encompasses both English and Scottish rather in the way that "American" must encompass both Texan and Californian ... (as a cultural concept, rather than political).
HTH

As a politician I have people say that to me so often. Only yesterday morning I visted a constituent (who'd got in touch because come election time lots of people contact their councillors) to talk about an issue that's been ongoing for a number of years. I and my ward colleagues have spent the last three months working on this issue, sending letters and emails and making phonecalls to the housing association that's at the centre of the problem.

She actually said to me, "I find it interesting that you've only surfaced now there's an election."

Three months of fucking work, at the urging of a couple of the residents and because I haven't vistited this particular resident and kept her informed of everything we were doing (beyond three 'Dear Resident' update letters, hand delivered by yours fucking truly to 100 fucking houses on three separate sunday mornings).

But hey, that's me just surface at election time.

One thing that's really surprised me about being involved in politics, is how much unseen and unrecognised work politicians generally do. That goes for the local and the national politicians I've met. The public have very low confidence and assume everyone's on the make and doing bugger all, especially with MPs. The MPs I know routinely work 70 and 80 hour weeks when parliament is in session.

The people of my borough pay their councillors less than 10k a year before tax. I know very few councillors who put in less than a 25 hour week. Most of them are doing that around their full time jobs.

When it's election time you try and get to speak to/ write to as many constituents as you can. That takes huge amounts of time and energy. For that 4 week period the amount of other stuff (complex ward work, council meetings, admin) that gets done shrinks. You cannot keep up that level of activity (writing to or delivering leaflets to or knocking on doors of 8000+ people) all year round.

They were, and still are in some ways. I've not denied that. The issue is not a black and white one though (pardon the pun), so it's possible that more research into the situation might benefit if you're interested.

My point is that I'm hopeful of better things in the future for all Australians. I understand that you're calling me a liar for suggesting all Australians are equal, but in reality we are. The problem is, the sins of the past are hard to shake off and there are a lot of things which can be done better. Any Australian citizen is entitled to the same benefits if they need them.

It could also be argued that Aboriginal people have an advantage over some other non indigenous Australians because they are entitled to 'extra' financial assistance for things like apprenticeships, training and even home loans believe it or not. I don't see it that way, but some people do.

I disagree. Politicians make promises going into elections and if successful these promises then become mandates.

John Howard promised to keep interest rates low. He failed. That's one of the main reasons he wasn't re-elected in my opinion. I don't really think the war in Iraq etc were big issues for people here. Another reason was because he increased taxes for middle and low income earners while decreasing them for higher income earners. When the majority of your constituents are low to middle income earners, that's a fatal mistake.

Kevin Rudd promised to ratify Kyoto which he did. He also promised an apology on behalf of the Austalian government, which he did at the very first opportunity. So far, he and his government have kept their word and I'm happy with that. Time will tell if things will continue in the same manner or not, but as I've said, I'm hopeful that they will.

To me, believing that politicians only care about themselves means there's no point in even caring about the political process which governs our lives. It means that being interested in what happens to people is pointless. It means that there's no hope of change. I can't believe that. If I did, what would be the point of living? If we didn't have a democratic process, I could understand your point more, but then we wouldn't be having this conversation anyway.

Don't take it too much to heart Dana. It's been the same in every job I've been in. The warehouse staff think the office staff sit and file their nails all day, the people in retail think head office are always at lunch, Managers think 70 letter mailouts send themselves (at 5 minutes to go on a Firday afternoon). Common misconceptions also include - stacking shelves in a supermarket is a low pressure job and staff have time to chat to you, all staff in charity shops are paid and very little of what you pay actually goes to charity, teachers have long holidays and do nothing during this time.

Keep your chin up, at least you're with the good guys, even if the general public forget that sometimes.
Ali I wonder if Dar realises how multi-cultural Australia is? I'm sure it's not a case of thinking you are a liar, but it's easy for outsiders to think of Aus as ex-pat Brits (knotted hankies, sunburns and all) and Aborginals! Having family in Australia, and family who have been there recently to visit, I totally back the multi-cultural aspect of Australian life. I don't think my parents ate the same cuisine two nights running when they were there, and their photos show the racial mix in Syndey for example.

All countries carry some shame from treatment of other people/ countries/ races whether new or old world. But I'd like to think it wasn't anyone here on the Cellar, any more that I'd expect a German poster to apologise for the two World Wars. So it's always going to be a case of not - what we did - but - what can we do?

Good on ya cobber, keep up the good work.

I reckon you're right with this here mate. I guess that's what I've been trying to demonstrate. If you went back as little as two generations you'd have been pretty close, but things have really changed here over the last 30 years or so, and I suppose it takes the rest of the world a while to understand that. For example, there's a study somewhere which I can't find, but it gives you a picture of what an average Sydney resident looked like 20 years ago, and then it gives you a picture of what an average Sydney resident will look like in 20 years time. The former is of white anglo saxon complexion. The latter is of european/asian complexion. Maybe it's accurate and maybe it's not. I think it's probably pretty spot on though. Anyway, it doesn't matter. If people care they'll go ahead and check it out for themselves.

Sing out loud. To arms! To arms! The British are coming! The British are coming! You'll feel so silly you'll smile. There's your funsies. :P



YES THAT

Isn't it ironic that colonists had to fight off the brits and the French to WIN independence and are viewed 'violent' by the aussies yet the aussies of criminal decent spurned by their motherland waited peacefuly 200 years for independence. ha

Bullshit. I know for a fact (as I do payroll), the last two financial years have seen low and middle income earners receive tax cuts.

re the interest rates....really a mute point. Our interest rates arent decided by John Howard, but are a reflection on what is happening in the wider world.

The libs were in power for over 10 years. Historically, higher income earners had more tax windfalls than lower under the Howard regimen.

The point is not moot with regard to interest rates. If Australian interest rate figures are a reflection of what's going on in the rest of the world, why is it that ours have been steadily climbing while those in the rest of the western world have been dropping? I don't buy that argument.

could it possible be to hold off inflation? interest rates don't rise to fuck the middle class ali, they rise to cause short term pain in the hope of preventing long term assdamage to everyone living in your society. the reason that your rates don't move in the same direction at the same time is because different economies are in different parts of the cycle.

They've raised interest rates to lower inflation. That's correct. Yes everything is cyclic, but if the Howard government hadn't pressured the reserve bank to keep interest rates low for so long, rather than allowing normal fluctuations, Australians might not be paying close to 10% interest on their mortgages now. Obviously there's a lot more involved than that, but the big one is consumer spending. When interest rates are low, the economy speeds up and people feel safe spending more on credit. I'm sure you know all this considering your line of work, so I don't need to go into it further.

My point wasn't so much that the previous government was right or wrong in particular, even though I disagreed with their policies in general. It was more that the rising interest rates cost them the election. Rightly or wrongly, people react to their own hip pocket, and these rate rises have affected everyone. Who should they blame? The people they percieve to be the reason for the pain. There aren't that many people who care to take into account the normal cycle of things or consider the reasons. Most people only consider how it affects them.

:eyebrow:

Brianna's a trouble maker. :p

Yeah, seems so.

I was just having a lark with this but NNNNNNNNNnooooooooooooooooooooo!


btw, what's the definition of curmudgeon? :rolleyes: