Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

At the heart of it that is what brexit was about.

Do you want to be part of a distinct place and culture or do you want to be one more region with just a (if you'll excuse the metaphor) seperate dish of food which you could get everywhere.

So when nowhere is different theres no point in going anywhere.

Yes, that's what I thought on the matter too. Remember how France used to have yellow headlights on their cars? It's little things like this that help give a country it's character, and I wouldn't ever want to give them up. Little laws like those give a country it's 'personality'.

Where does that stop, though? If yellow headlights were demonstrably less efficient than neon green ones, to use an absurd example, why keep the yellow ones other than due to an appeal to history? Similarly, if a bunch of Germans really like bouillabaisse, why would it be so wrong for them to find like-minded people in Germany and incorporate bouillabaisse, or any other concept they like, into German culture? Because some other Germans disapprove of bouillabaisse?

Culture isn't static or independent from other cultures, no matter how much one might wish it were so.

But integration for integrations sake is not the answer either. People don't get on generally. People from different cultures tend to get on even less.

We have the strange situation where we currently stipulate white headlamps despite 'selective yellow' headlamps being technically superior!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_yellow

Thats pretty much the case for motor vehicles currently - there's no way (with current technology) of fitting an airbag into an old steering wheel without significant changes to the structure and aesthetics.

If those hypothetical Germans decided that they were going to live in the same place and give the new dish a new German name then fair play to them, it's just jumped cultures.
Until that happens then they are a group of Germans who appreciate french seafood imo.

I cite the 'weiner' as my example. (or is it the wurstl? or frankfurter?)

The thing is though, France hardly abandoned their headlights just for the sake of integration. Similarly, architecture looks the way it does because architects wanted their buildings to look that way, not because of some strive to homogenise everything. In a more interconnected world people are applying new concepts to places those concepts haven't been before. This has always been the case, but is especially relevant today with the Internet changing our means of communicating and spreading cultures and ideas.

For instance, I have stronger cultural ties, in a sense, with people here on Dakka than I do with a Swedish sports nut from Kiruna, to the far north of Sweden. Pushing me to stop wargaming so that this hypothetical sports nut can be content with his reality not changing is hardly fair, the same way that expecting a fish'n'chips salesman from Mumbai living in Slough to stop liking Bollywood movies is unreasonable. Is someone being forced to eat Tikka Masala just because the option to do so exists, or is that option existing harming anyone? Is your enjoyment of cullen skink being somehow reduced because the dude next to you is eating sushi?

EDIT: Dear me the headlight example is getting silly.

Skullhammer wrote:
At the heart of it that is what brexit was about.

Do you want to be part of a distinct place and culture or do you want to be one more region with just a (if you'll excuse the metaphor) seperate dish of food which you could get everywhere.

So when nowhere is different theres no point in going anywhere.

So the suggestion is that Brexit should be supported so that (metaphorically) every restaurant only sells Fish and Chips, Roast Beef, Apple Crumble and Brussel Sprouts? That the UK should legislate to ban Mexican Tapas bars, Indian Restaurants, Thai Curry and German sausage. I find that idea quite bemusing. None of these things are going to go away (some may close during recession) but there is a demand for a variety of food types from the public at large, why do we think they are going to disappear just because of a referendum?

You are also fighting a tide that you can't win. No change means stagnation. The Architecture we see today arose because of waves of migration bringing new ideas across the different countries and how these mingled together in different proportions resulted in the different architecture today. It will continue to happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 welshhoppo wrote:
But integration for integrations sake is not the answer either. People don't get on generally. People from different cultures tend to get on even less.

Speak for yourself. I know plenty of people from different countries, religions and I get on with them fine and they get on with me fine. I think the comment should be "Some people from different cultures aren't willing to get on". All scientific evidence points to the fact that once people get to know each other they work and play together just fine. It's when different groups of people isolate themselves and "echo chamber" untruths that the situation changes. If you skinned us all/used an electronic voice and stood us in a room then no one would be able to tell anyone apart on the basis of their origin.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SirDonlad wrote:
You're prepared to give up your citizenship in exchange for the convenience of not having to use a passport on holiday?

I'd be happy to give up UK citizenship for EU citizenship. It's not for the ease of travel though. I no longer really believe in the direction that is being quoted as 'British ideals' because they are being twisted and corrupted into something that I no longer associate myself with.

 Steve steveson wrote:
1) I doubt 60% of people would ever claim it. Even if the whole country wanted to be part of the EU I doubt 60% of people would be bothered to fill in the paperwork.

2) Who cares about all this crap. I don't care about Brexit or Trump any more, now I know chocolate is at risk. All the plants could die out? WTF? This should now be the world priority.

Presumably other people are worried or why oppose it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SirDonlad wrote:
You're prepared to give up your citizenship in exchange for the convenience of not having to use a passport on holiday?

I liked Europe with borders and different currencies - each country felt distinct; i just don't get that now.
In my mind there is no such thing as Belgium now - it's too similar to France to be noticed when driving through.
Them and Luxembourg.

Yes, I am perfectly happy with it.

Why are you so strongly against my having that option?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Yes, that's what I thought on the matter too. Remember how France used to have yellow headlights on their cars? It's little things like this that help give a country it's character, and I wouldn't ever want to give them up. Little laws like those give a country it's 'personality'.

feth yeah! God damn the EU for not allowing yellow headlights. They are the very Devil!

Or something.

Maybe it's Class II bananas or cucumbers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:
@Whirlwind Surely it really boils down to a binary choice? Article 50 gets invoked. You can either stay in the UK as a UK citizen or move to an EU member state or otherwise and claim citizenship with whatever benefits that brings?

I'm genuinely curious.

A UK citizen can't be deprived of their citizenship.

If the EU offers an EU passport to any UK citizen who wants one, the government can't prevent them.

Why would Brexiteers care if someone wants an EU passport? What harm does it do them?

Until something like that comes to pass though I cant be sure how I feel, I'm certainly not going full pants on head meltdown. It does feel wrong though.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


A UK citizen can't be deprived of their citizenship.

If the EU offers an EU passport to any UK citizen who wants one, the government can't prevent them.

Why would Brexiteers care if someone wants an EU passport? What harm does it do them?

To be honest given the direction the UK is heading I'd quite happily surrender my British citizenship and replace it with EU citizenship. Each day I like less and less to be associated as British.

I think from the Brexiter's point of view if you get to the point where 60% of the population are still members of the EU then it calls into question the point of Brexit in the first place. Also the UK population will start to be able to have a say on what policies the EU introduces and that could result in policies that the UK would have to implement which goes against the overbearing nationalistic agenda that is currently being peddled.

Lets be fair, if 60% want to be members of the EU then there should be moves to siddle back in.

And it would be entirely fair to do so. A lot of the burning desire for a fast Brexit comes from the point that a good number of people clearly regretted their Leave vote the next morning, or since, as the many difficulties emerged.

Such as the complete lack of an idea of what Brexit actually is, let alone a plan for achieving it.

If the referendum were to be held again in January, or a Parliamentary debate in March, the result might be different. This is why Brexiteers strongly oppose anything that gives the nation a chance to express a change of mind.

What I'm posting here is in the nature of speculatory thinking out loud with regards to several of the posts above (I won't specify though, too many to be convenient).

The British have always, historically speaking, been suspicious of both the Continent and their politics. We spent long decades as one of the few Protestant nations in existence peering anxiously across at countries with far larger treasuries and land armies. Shortly after that ceased to be relevant, we were terrified of the French Revolution spreading, followed by the threat of Napoleon. After that, we had to face the new worry of Russian expansionism.

Cut twenty to thirty years past the Crimean and we were staring anxiously at a French/Russian combo (we had a number of invasion scares throughout the 1870's and 1880's, culminating in the Naval Defence Act of 1889). Then we had the rise of Imperial Germany, followed in reasonably rapid succesion by two world wars and the promotion of facism. Then the Cold War, and the rise of Communism.

Speaking in generalities, Britain has stood like a rock in an extremely turbulent part of the world for the last three to four hundred years. We've watched countries rise and fall, seen the entirety of Europe submit to marauding armies time and again, witnessed the (usually violent) upheavals of new political systems, and somehow remained relatively unscathed by all of them. And that's told quite heavily, I think, on our cultural makeup, in ways that make us quite suspicious of Europe.

Firstly, it's made us fiercely independent and wary about entrusting power to anyone who isn't based on these isles. I'll wager most people would rather see Holyrood rule the Uk than Brussels.

Secondly, it's led to a conception of ourselves as being separate from Europe ('Oh, so you're from over in Europe are you?').

Thirdly, it's made us more sceptical, I would suspect, of hardcore political ideology in general and correspondingly less susceptible to rhetoric about the benefits of integration, globalism, and so on. You'll rarely catch your average Brit waxing lyrical about any form of political belief or view of how the world 'should' be.

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general. There's a reason that ID cards here flopped, and the British have always hated having a large standing army. Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives, whereas most on the Continent accept such things as a matter of course. The more legislation the EU has passed, whether it can be considered to be 'good' or 'bad', the more it has come to be perceived in the UK as meddling and dictating.

Finally, the pure longevity of our system generally, means that most people (who aren't hysterical 20 year old liberal art students on facebook) have a certain amount of subconscious faith in the system. We might not like whoever is in power at any given moment (we rarely do, grumbling is mandatory), but we all believe very firmly, to the point that virtually nobody considers the alternative, that tomorrow will be much like today. The Government won't be taken over by facists, the army won't launch a coup, the power will keep turning on, and if all goes tits up, the government will try and do something about it (even if they fail).

This is something I think most Europeans are lacking. Germany isn't even 150 years old and it's been reconstituted how many times? What Republic is France on now? Etc. To them, the EU represents a certain stability, a security from the chaos and turmoil of war and extreme politics and avaricious neighbours.

But Britain? We don't worry about these things because of that faith in the system. We don't feel the need for the EU to 'protect' us, or to make desperate shows of unity to try and avoid a return to the 'bad old days'. Because for us, Britain was here a century ago, and we have faith it'll still be trundling along well enough in another hundred or so. Therefore we feel we have far less to lose by leaving it. To us, it's just another one of those hodgepodge Continental organisations/politics that spring up every thirty to forty years, and crumble again in as short a space of time.

And who knows? It might well be. Time will tell.

 Ketara wrote:
Posting Awesome Stuff

Spoiler:

What I'm posting here is in the nature of speculatory thinking out loud with regards to several of the posts above (I won't specify though, too many to be convenient).

The British have always, historically speaking, been suspicious of both the Continent and their politics. We spent long decades as one of the few Protestant nations in existence peering anxiously across at countries with far larger treasuries and land armies. Shortly after that ceased to be relevant, we were terrified of the French Revolution spreading, followed by the threat of Napoleon. After that, we had to face the new worry of Russian expansionism.

Cut twenty to thirty years past the Crimean and we were staring anxiously at a French/Russian combo (we had a number of invasion scares throughout the 1870's and 1880's, culminating in the Naval Defence Act of 1889). Then we had the rise of Imperial Germany, followed in reasonably rapid succesion by two world wars and the promotion of facism. Then the Cold War, and the rise of Communism.

Speaking in generalities, Britain has stood like a rock in an extremely turbulent part of the world for the last three to four hundred years. We've watched countries rise and fall, seen the entirety of Europe submit to marauding armies time and again, witnessed the (usually violent) upheavals of new political systems, and somehow remained relatively unscathed by all of them. And that's told quite heavily, I think, on our cultural makeup, in ways that make us quite suspicious of Europe.

Firstly, it's made us fiercely independent and wary about entrusting power to anyone who isn't based on these isles. I'll wager most people would rather see Holyrood rule the Uk than Brussels.

Secondly, it's led to a conception of ourselves as being separate from Europe ('Oh, so you're from over in Europe are you?').

Thirdly, it's made us more sceptical, I would suspect, of hardcore political ideology in general and correspondingly less susceptible to rhetoric about the benefits of integration, globalism, and so on. You'll rarely catch your average Brit waxing lyrical about any form of political belief or view of how the world 'should' be.

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general. There's a reason that ID cards here flopped, and the British have always hated having a large standing army. Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives, whereas most on the Continent accept such things as a matter of course. The more legislation the EU has passed, whether it can be considered to be 'good' or 'bad', the more it has come to be perceived in the UK as meddling and dictating.

Finally, the pure longevity of our system generally, means that most people (who aren't hysterical 20 year old liberal art students on facebook) have a certain amount of subconscious faith in the system. We might not like whoever is in power at any given moment (we rarely do, grumbling is mandatory), but we all believe very firmly, to the point that virtually nobody considers the alternative, that tomorrow will be much like today. The Government won't be taken over by facists, the army won't launch a coup, the power will keep turning on, and if all goes tits up, the government will try and do something about it (even if they fail).

This is something I think most Europeans are lacking. Germany isn't even 150 years old and it's been reconstituted how many times? What Republic is France on now? Etc. To them, the EU represents a certain stability, a security from the chaos and turmoil of war and extreme politics and avaricious neighbours. But Britain? We don't worry about these things because of that faith in the system. We don't feel the need for the EU to 'protect' us against these things, or to make desperate shows of unity to try and avoid a return to the 'bad old days'. Because for us, Britain was here a century ago, and we have faith it'll still be trundling along in another hundred.

And so we feel we have far less to lose by leaving it. To us, it's just another one of those hodgepodge Continental organisations/politics that spring up every thirty to forty years, and crumble again in as short a space of time.

Would read it again.

Thanks.

Skullhammer wrote:
At the heart of it that is what brexit was about.

Do you want to be part of a distinct place and culture or do you want to be one more region with just a (if you'll excuse the metaphor) seperate dish of food which you could get everywhere.

So when nowhere is different theres no point in going anywhere.

The US has been much more integrated and federalised than the EU is ever likely to be, has a shared language and identity yet there is huge cultural differences across the country. Texas is totally different to the Great Lakes, which is totally different again to LA for example. Broad brush, and randomly picked areas of the US, but does show that there is no foundation at all to an idea that somewhere like the EU would become homogeneous just because we have some agreed standards on car lights and the like.

@almightywalrus: the architects can only operate within the confines of the building regulations of the area in question, so they may not want their buildings to look alike and indeed strive to make them look distinctive and different (thats what the client presumably wants) but a law or regulation can induce a common feature to manifest in all/most designs; hence why i brought up the Tudor house/taxation thing.
It's the same reason that a lot of older dutch buildings have very narrow frontages, stairs that look like ladders and a lifting spar at the top of the frontage; taxation and regulation.
But also distinctly Dutch, and i like that.

I agree - we're very early on in our use of a type-1 communication system and it's brought a lot of influence to just about every culture on earth, but that doesn't mean it's a good influence or that we should abandon our own cultural uniqueness; in fact it puts the onus on us to preserve our cultural differences despite that.

I disagree with the idea that we need to become a unified legal framework to ensure that we can experience or immerse ourselves in a different culture, the one thing i can see which is inevitable is the erosion of our own or even worse - turning our cultural differences into a triviality; each country gets a different 'special' on the menu.

 Steve steveson wrote:

Skullhammer wrote:
At the heart of it that is what brexit was about.

Do you want to be part of a distinct place and culture or do you want to be one more region with just a (if you'll excuse the metaphor) seperate dish of food which you could get everywhere.

So when nowhere is different theres no point in going anywhere.

The US has been much more integrated and federalised than the EU is ever likely to be, has a shared language and identity yet there is huge cultural differences across the country. Texas is totally different to the Great Lakes, which is totally different again to LA for example. Broad brush, and randomly picked areas of the US, but does show that there is no foundation at all to an idea that somewhere like the EU would become homogeneous just because we have some agreed standards on car lights and the like.

Um... that's because we share the same identity as American.

But culturally, we're not that different.

Federalizing the EU is going to be a mammoth endeavor

 whembly wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Posting Awesome Stuff

Spoiler:

What I'm posting here is in the nature of speculatory thinking out loud with regards to several of the posts above (I won't specify though, too many to be convenient).

The British have always, historically speaking, been suspicious of both the Continent and their politics. We spent long decades as one of the few Protestant nations in existence peering anxiously across at countries with far larger treasuries and land armies. Shortly after that ceased to be relevant, we were terrified of the French Revolution spreading, followed by the threat of Napoleon. After that, we had to face the new worry of Russian expansionism.

Cut twenty to thirty years past the Crimean and we were staring anxiously at a French/Russian combo (we had a number of invasion scares throughout the 1870's and 1880's, culminating in the Naval Defence Act of 1889). Then we had the rise of Imperial Germany, followed in reasonably rapid succesion by two world wars and the promotion of facism. Then the Cold War, and the rise of Communism.

Speaking in generalities, Britain has stood like a rock in an extremely turbulent part of the world for the last three to four hundred years. We've watched countries rise and fall, seen the entirety of Europe submit to marauding armies time and again, witnessed the (usually violent) upheavals of new political systems, and somehow remained relatively unscathed by all of them. And that's told quite heavily, I think, on our cultural makeup, in ways that make us quite suspicious of Europe.

Firstly, it's made us fiercely independent and wary about entrusting power to anyone who isn't based on these isles. I'll wager most people would rather see Holyrood rule the Uk than Brussels.

Secondly, it's led to a conception of ourselves as being separate from Europe ('Oh, so you're from over in Europe are you?').

Thirdly, it's made us more sceptical, I would suspect, of hardcore political ideology in general and correspondingly less susceptible to rhetoric about the benefits of integration, globalism, and so on. You'll rarely catch your average Brit waxing lyrical about any form of political belief or view of how the world 'should' be.

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general. There's a reason that ID cards here flopped, and the British have always hated having a large standing army. Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives, whereas most on the Continent accept such things as a matter of course. The more legislation the EU has passed, whether it can be considered to be 'good' or 'bad', the more it has come to be perceived in the UK as meddling and dictating.

Finally, the pure longevity of our system generally, means that most people (who aren't hysterical 20 year old liberal art students on facebook) have a certain amount of subconscious faith in the system. We might not like whoever is in power at any given moment (we rarely do, grumbling is mandatory), but we all believe very firmly, to the point that virtually nobody considers the alternative, that tomorrow will be much like today. The Government won't be taken over by facists, the army won't launch a coup, the power will keep turning on, and if all goes tits up, the government will try and do something about it (even if they fail).

This is something I think most Europeans are lacking. Germany isn't even 150 years old and it's been reconstituted how many times? What Republic is France on now? Etc. To them, the EU represents a certain stability, a security from the chaos and turmoil of war and extreme politics and avaricious neighbours. But Britain? We don't worry about these things because of that faith in the system. We don't feel the need for the EU to 'protect' us against these things, or to make desperate shows of unity to try and avoid a return to the 'bad old days'. Because for us, Britain was here a century ago, and we have faith it'll still be trundling along in another hundred.

And so we feel we have far less to lose by leaving it. To us, it's just another one of those hodgepodge Continental organisations/politics that spring up every thirty to forty years, and crumble again in as short a space of time.

Would read it again.

Thanks.

I think that's the first thing I've seen a MOD write that I actually like.

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general.

Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives

Describes me to a T.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general.

Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives

Describes me to a T.

Fun fact... that describes the US' Tea Party event in 2008-2010 and US conservative/libertarians in general.

Well. Thats Ketara's post exalted.

@ Ketara

Thank you so much for that. I exalt you.

@ Kilkrazy

I don't really appreciate the sarcasm.

 whembly wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general.

Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives

Describes me to a T.

Fun fact... that describes the US' Tea Party event in 2008-2010 and US conservative/libertarians in general.

Well, I don't care for labels but when I do those political compass tests I tend to come out as a centre moderate libertarian. I agree with the Left on some things, I agree with the Right on some things, but above all I dislike authoritarianism. And sadly, all our mainstream parties are authoritarian.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general.

Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives

Describes me to a T.

Fun fact... that describes the US' Tea Party event in 2008-2010 and US conservative/libertarians in general.

Well, I don't care for labels but when I do those political compass tests I tend to come out as a centre moderate libertarian. I agree with the Left on some things, I agree with the Right on some things, but above all I dislike authoritarianism. And sadly, all our mainstream parties are authoritarian.

Yeah... authoritarianism is going to happen here the US.

My rather clumsy metaphor was due to all the talk about haggis at tea time (when i read it). So im glad its been taken as intended and not 'nit picked' .

To me what ketara wrote above is very good. Think about it, the legal case about brexit going on relies on a 400 (ish) year old law most other european countrys were/are nowhere near the same in scope/size and even names let alone legal and cultural history. Its true that change is a good thing and cannot be stopped nor should it be, but the speed of change is unsetteling for a country that changes slowly, is it national pride thats to blame having a long and continued history i feel it is. The newer coms do allow a lot quicker exchange of ideas and not all of them good.
well the point of this ramble is to say that change is ok but the eu seems like another one of the hear today gone tomorrow empires. Starts with good intentions but ultimately fails and i/most brits dont do short term empire building by choice.

Even the United Kingdom, ultimately, didn't come about from anything dramatic or exciting but essentially was just simply the result of a multiple centuries long game of Gloom.

@whembley: Relax man, if trump follows that 'contract with the American voter' thing (and since theres two signatures on that document you can sue him personally if he doesn't) it will clean up washington quite significantly.

Back on topic...
Ketara; nicely put, i always look forward to your longer posts.

 Compel wrote:
Even the United Kingdom, ultimately, didn't come about from anything dramatic or exciting but essentially was just simply the result of a multiple centuries long game of Gloom.

Love that game with the best pet name evar!

Bopobadingo!

 Ketara wrote:
To *approximately 50% of those that voted in the referendum* it's just another one of those hodgepodge Continental organisations/politics that spring up every thirty to forty years, and crumble again in as short a space of time.

Amended for accuracy; I'd prefer not to be lumped in with the Brexiters thanks! For me as a remainer the EU represents freedom of movement, expression and thought without fear of being restricted or persecuted (such as by the deplorable daily mail) because of the piece of rock I was borne on.

But on the post as a whole. It's all well and good thinking about the past and how 'independent' we were but most of that was nothing to do with stubbornness or 'the British people' but more or less solely because, relatively speaking, there was a honking great chunk of water between us and the rest of Europe. However looking back is no use in the rapidly changing world of the last 50 years. That body of water is now nothing more than a puddle that can be crossed in minutes. Technology is no longer reliant on coal, iron and wood which were the major feedstocks 60 years ago. The advanced items we take for granted are reliant on rare earth metals and other uncommon materials scattered across the globe, where jointly working together is the only way of effectively extracting them and using them efficiently. We are facing global issues such as climate change, mass extinctions, a food and water crisis that needs to be solved by countries working in concert and not isolating themselves in thought of going back to some imaginary glory days that never really existed. To continue in the way we have worked for the last several hundred years will see us increasing isolated and stuck in a mindset that is no longer of any use.

 Ketara wrote:


But Britain? We don't worry about these things because of that faith in the system. We don't feel the need for the EU to 'protect' us, or to make desperate shows of unity to try and avoid a return to the 'bad old days'. Because for us, Britain was here a century ago, and we have faith it'll still be trundling along well enough in another hundred or so. Therefore we feel we have far less to lose by leaving it. To us, it's just another one of those hodgepodge Continental organisations/politics that spring up every thirty to forty years, and crumble again in as short a space of time.

And who knows? It might well be. Time will tell.

Britain has only recently found an island of stability (on the scale of human civilization). Before that it was all a bit more complicated (like everywhere else). Just assuming that Britain is somehow special because it found a system that works a tiny bit earlier than the rest seems illogical. With Brexit it looks like parts of the UK have lost faith in the system. Maybe Britain just peaked early and is now slowly crumbling? After all, nothing lasts forever.

I did enjoy reading how we have both "faith" in the system, at the same time as a "mistrust" of government.

It was enjoyable to read though, it gives you the same sort of feeling as the Hovis advert from the 70s, I could almost hear the brass band playing in the background.
Reading that it seems we could make Britain great again, we just need our own wotsit jebus to lead the way.

Whirlwind wrote:
Amended for accuracy; I'd prefer not to be lumped in with the Brexiters thanks! For me as a remainer the EU represents freedom of movement, expression and thought without fear of being restricted or persecuted (such as by the deplorable daily mail) because of the piece of rock I was borne on.

I suspect your amendment is more inaccurate than what it replaced. I know few who voted remain that /love the EU or what it represents or even hold views as to its longterm durability. They generally just view it as the best possible choice of the two, as opposed to enthusiastically waving a blue star spangled banner around, so to speak.

But on the post as a whole. It's all well and good thinking about the past and how 'independent' we were but most of that was nothing to do with stubbornness or 'the British people' but more or less solely because, relatively speaking, there was a honking great chunk of water between us and the rest of Europe.

What precisely are you saying here? The moat has certainly contributed to enabling the circumstances for certain mentalities to develop, but it's hardly a primary cause of a national archetype (which is what you appear to be implying).

However looking back is no use in the rapidly changing world of the last 50 years. That body of water is now nothing more than a puddle that can be crossed in minutes. Technology is no longer reliant on coal, iron and wood which were the major feedstocks 60 years ago. The advanced items we take for granted are reliant on rare earth metals and other uncommon materials scattered across the globe, where jointly working together is the only way of effectively extracting them and using them efficiently. We are facing global issues such as climate change, mass extinctions, a food and water crisis that needs to be solved by countries working in concert and not isolating themselves in thought of going back to some imaginary glory days that never really existed. To continue in the way we have worked for the last several hundred years will see us increasing isolated and stuck in a mindset that is no longer of any use.

I don't think anyone wants to see a return to the days of splendid isolation (or even thinks it feasible). But it's a far cry from being aware of that fact and associating the future as being with the EU.

It's a bit like religion. Nobody denies that something (event, person, whatever) has to have made everything, but it's a massive jump from that to the God of classical theism. Acknowledging one doesn't presuppose the necessity of the latter.

Mario wrote:Just assuming that Britain is somehow special because it found a system that works a tiny bit earlier than the rest seems illogical.

I think it is worth considering why the British system still grinds along actually, because it is so very different from all the others. We have no written constitution, we still have a monarchy, our judges all wear silly wigs and robes, and so on. If you tried to transplant it to say, Sudan, you'd have a facist dictator inside of twenty years, but here? It all works. Somehow. I'm not saying it is 'special', but it's hardly national boasting to say that it is unique, and to try and analyse why that is. Better minds than mine, both domestic and foreign have tried to do so in the past, and will doubtless continue to do so in the future.

With Brexit it looks like parts of the UK have lost faith in the system. Maybe Britain just peaked early and is now slowly crumbling? After all, nothing lasts forever.

Britain has had a well documented obsession with 'declinism' since the 1880's, just to put that into perspective. We had a Parliamentary Inquiry into it and everything. Looking back now, it boggles the mind that what was thought of as 'declining Britain' back then was simply less breakneck economic growth than they were used to (they still had a decent growth rate). So yes, perceptions are not always accurate, and on this very specific and well researched subject, more inaccurate than on most things.

If you're genuinely interested in a short course in the fallacy and revocation of British declinism, the appropriate reading list would be;

For the declinist form of history/view of the world, see:
'The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present' by David Landes
'The Weary Titan: Britain and the Experience of Relative Decline, 1895-1905' by Aaron Friedburg
'The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000' and 'The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery' by Paul Kennedy
Everything by Correlli Barnett (he of the most amusing Nazi fantasies)

There's a lot that's nailed the above works to the ground over the last thirty years. To keep it brief, see Bernstein's 'Myth of Decline', or David Edgerton's (very smart fellow, works at my uni) 'Science, Technology and the British Industrial Decline 1870-1970' for a very good summation that can point to more exhaustive sources.

 Ketara wrote:

Spoiler:

]What I'm posting here is in the nature of speculatory thinking out loud with regards to several of the posts above (I won't specify though, too many to be convenient).

The British have always, historically speaking, been suspicious of both the Continent and their politics. We spent long decades as one of the few Protestant nations in existence peering anxiously across at countries with far larger treasuries and land armies. Shortly after that ceased to be relevant, we were terrified of the French Revolution spreading, followed by the threat of Napoleon. After that, we had to face the new worry of Russian expansionism.

Cut twenty to thirty years past the Crimean and we were staring anxiously at a French/Russian combo (we had a number of invasion scares throughout the 1870's and 1880's, culminating in the Naval Defence Act of 1889). Then we had the rise of Imperial Germany, followed in reasonably rapid succesion by two world wars and the promotion of facism. Then the Cold War, and the rise of Communism.

Speaking in generalities, Britain has stood like a rock in an extremely turbulent part of the world for the last three to four hundred years. We've watched countries rise and fall, seen the entirety of Europe submit to marauding armies time and again, witnessed the (usually violent) upheavals of new political systems, and somehow remained relatively unscathed by all of them. And that's told quite heavily, I think, on our cultural makeup, in ways that make us quite suspicious of Europe.

Firstly, it's made us fiercely independent and wary about entrusting power to anyone who isn't based on these isles. I'll wager most people would rather see Holyrood rule the Uk than Brussels.

Secondly, it's led to a conception of ourselves as being separate from Europe ('Oh, so you're from over in Europe are you?').

Thirdly, it's made us more sceptical, I would suspect, of hardcore political ideology in general and correspondingly less susceptible to rhetoric about the benefits of integration, globalism, and so on. You'll rarely catch your average Brit waxing lyrical about any form of political belief or view of how the world 'should' be.

Fourth, it's made us suspicious of government in general. There's a reason that ID cards here flopped, and the British have always hated having a large standing army. Brits generally like a minimum of government interference in their personal lives, whereas most on the Continent accept such things as a matter of course. The more legislation the EU has passed, whether it can be considered to be 'good' or 'bad', the more it has come to be perceived in the UK as meddling and dictating.

Finally, the pure longevity of our system generally, means that most people (who aren't hysterical 20 year old liberal art students on facebook) have a certain amount of subconscious faith in the system. We might not like whoever is in power at any given moment (we rarely do, grumbling is mandatory), but we all believe very firmly, to the point that virtually nobody considers the alternative, that tomorrow will be much like today. The Government won't be taken over by facists, the army won't launch a coup, the power will keep turning on, and if all goes tits up, the government will try and do something about it (even if they fail).

This is something I think most Europeans are lacking. Germany isn't even 150 years old and it's been reconstituted how many times? What Republic is France on now? Etc. To them, the EU represents a certain stability, a security from the chaos and turmoil of war and extreme politics and avaricious neighbours.

But Britain? We don't worry about these things because of that faith in the system. We don't feel the need for the EU to 'protect' us, or to make desperate shows of unity to try and avoid a return to the 'bad old days'. Because for us, Britain was here a century ago, and we have faith it'll still be trundling along well enough in another hundred or so. Therefore we feel we have far less to lose by leaving it. To us, it's just another one of those hodgepodge Continental organisations/politics that spring up every thirty to forty years, and crumble again in as short a space of time.

And who knows? It might well be. Time will tell.

It's not strange that some people in countries on the geographical periphery of Europe have doubts whether they are truly part of it. Change a few lines here and there and this text could be applied to Russia and Turkey as well.

Distrust of the EU as an political entity is common enough across Europe, but the fear of the other members as some kind of unified collective is in my experience uniquely British.

 r_squared wrote:
I did enjoy reading how we have both "faith" in the system, at the same time as a "mistrust" of government.

It was enjoyable to read though, it gives you the same sort of feeling as the Hovis advert from the 70s, I could almost hear the brass band playing in the background.
Reading that it seems we could make Britain great again, we just need our own wotsit jebus to lead the way.

It is quite funny, isn't it? We're all convinced our politicians are crap and corrupt, our system outdated and unrepresentative, and that our authoritarian government is out to spy on everything we do, but at the same time? Nobody is seriously scared that next year the secret police will be making people 'disappear', or that the army will launch a coup, or the voting system get rigged. I asked my mother, the most stereotypical working class Brit you can imagine (no formal education, housewife, and so on) if she thought the British Governmental institution as it is today would still be around in five, thirty and a hundred years, and she said yes to all without barely a seconds hesitation. And she's as suspicious of them as they come!

The greatest thing about this country is how stable and secure it is. The moat helps, but really, it's the people that make it so. I suspect if a ninja assassin killed every member of government and civil servant overnight, we'd have rebuilt it more or less the same as it is now within about five weeks.