How proud are you of being British?

[Jim JTS]

You don’t get out much though Raz ;)

Nice piece there Jane and a piece that I’m proud of, I’ve posted that many times on various forums and there’s usually no reply after it, Raz is an exception! :biggrin:

[stevedvg]

My original post wasn’t meant to be a "Scotland is better than England" post.

I pointed out that (like most people in Britain) I don’t regard myself as British and then applied Kotki’s question to being proud of being scottish.

I think that Scotland has achieved great things for the world (as have other countries), but those things have been ignored and the average modern day Scot is more interested in the "William Wallace, tartan and kilts" notion of Scottishness.

And I think that’s a poor choice which reflects badly on the nation and has left us with a "chip on the shoulder, plucky loser" mentality and set low expectations.

If we had chosen instead to have seen ourselves in the reflection of the likes of Andrew Carnegie or Alexander Graham Bell who went out into the world with a sense of possibility and the desire to make a great contribution, I think we’d be a better country.

Steve  

[wit]

Jim JTS,

Just to show that this forum is unlike others and that there’s a first time for everything:

<br>CORRECTED PER BLOCK CAPITALS:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>Wha’s Like Us?, by  T Anderson Cairns.

The average Englishman in the home he calls his castle, slips into his national costume-a shabby raincoat- patented by Chemist Charles Macintosh from Glasgow, Scotland. <br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

MAYBE MACINTOSH CLAIMED THE PATENT,  BUT HE TOOK THE TECHNOLOGY FOR THE MAC FROM THE ENGLISH INVENTOR THOMAS HANCOCK, FOUNDER OF THE BRITISH RUBBER INDUSTRY.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inve … lastic.htm

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>Enroute to his office he strides along the English lane, surfaced by John Macadam of Ayr, Scotland. <br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>NOT SO.  

MACADAMIZED ROADS (IE ONES WITH SMALL STONES) WERE ADEQUATE FOR USE BY HORSES AND CARRIAGES OR COACHES, BUT THEY WERE VERY DUSTY AND DID NOT HOLD UP TO HIGHER SPEED MOTOR VEHICLE USE.

PASSING A TARWORKS  IN 1901, E PURNELL HOOLEY OBSERVED A BARREL OF TAR HAD SPILLED ON THE ROADWAY, AND IN AN ATTEMPT TO REDUCE THE MESS, GRAVEL HAD BEEN DUMPED ON TOP OF IT. THE AREA WAS REMARKABLY DUST-FREE COMPARED TO THE SURROUNDING ROAD.

THIS OBSERVATION INSPIRED HOOLEY TO DEVELOP AND PATENT TARMAC IN BRITAIN AND, LATER, THE US.  

HE CALLED HIS COMPANY TAR MACADAM (PURNELL HOOLEY’S PATENT) SYNDICATE LIMITED, BUT UNFORTUNATELY HE HAD TROUBLE SELLING HIS PRODUCT AS HE WAS NOT A VERY COMPETENT BUSINESSMAN.

HIS COMPANY WAS SOON BOUGHT OUT BY THE WOLVERHAMPTON MP, SIR ALFRED HICKMAN, THE OWNER OF A STEELWORKS WHICH PRODUCED LARGE QUANTITIES OF WASTE SLAG.

THE TARMAC COMPANY WAS RELAUNCHED AND BECAME AN IMMEDIATE SUCCESS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarmac

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>He drives an English car fitted with tyres invented by John Boyd Dunlop, Veterinary Surgeon of Dreghorn, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

NOT SO.  

APART FROM THERE BEING FEW ENGLISH CARS (AND NO SCOTS CARS), DUNLOP HAD MOVED TO BELFAST IN 1867 AND DID NOT INVENT THE TYRE UNTIL 1888.  

ALL DEVELOPMENT AND INVENTION OF THE PNEUMATIC TYRE WAS BY JOHN BOYD DUNLOP OF BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND.

http://www.ulsterhistory.co.uk/johndunlop.htm

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>At the office he receives the mail bearing adhesive stamps invented by John Chalmers, Bookseller and Printer of Dundee, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

NOT SO.

THE FIRST ADNESIVE POSTAGE STAMP – THE PENNY BLACK – WAS INVENTED BY ROWLAND HILL, AN ENGLISH SCHOOLMASTER.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inve … stamps.htm

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>During the day he uses the telephone invented by Alexander Graham Bell, born in Edinburgh, Scotland.<br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

BELL WON THE RACE TO THE PATENT OFFICE BY A FEW HOURS – BUT ELISHA GRAY OF CHICAGO HAD INVENTED IT INDEPENDENTLY AT THE SAME TIME.  

http://inventors.about.com/library/inve … ephone.htm

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br> At home in the evening his daughter pedals her bicycle invented by Kirkpatrick Macmillan, Blacksmith of Thornhill, Dumfriesshire, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

NOT SO.

MANY INVENTORS OF THE BICYCLE BEFORE AND AFTER HIM.

HE INVENTED THE FIRST WITH FOOT PEDALS, BUT NEVER PATENTED IT AND IT WASN’T HIS VERSION THAT CAUGHT ON.

THE MODERN BICYCLE WAS INVENTED IN 1860 BY ERNEST MICHAUX.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inve … icycle.htm

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/invent … ycle.shtml

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>He watches the news on T.V. an invention of John Logie Baird of Helensburgh, Scotland ……..<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

NO.

BAIRD WAS ONE OF SEVERAL INVOLVED IN MECHANICAL TELEVISION, WHICH WAS QUICKLY SUPPLANTED BY ELECTRONIC TELEVISION.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inve … Television

THE INVENTOR OF MODERN ELECTRONIC TV IS PHILO TAYLOR FRANSWORTH, FROM UTAH.  

http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae408.cfm

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>…..and hears an item about the U.S. Navy founded by John Paul Jones of Kirkbean, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

WELL……A FOUNDER, PERHAPS – BUT AGAIN ONLY SOME TIME AFTER HE HAD EMIGRATED TO THE US.

http://www.usa-patriotism.com/tribute/h … pjones.htm

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>Nowhere can an Englishman turn to escape the ingenuity of the Scots…..<br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

…..FOR MAKING DODGY CLAIMS TO PROMOTE A NATIONALISTIC AGENDA?  

MOREOVER, CLAIMS WHICH IT IS UNLIKELY THAT MANY OF THE EXCELLENT INDIVIDUALS NAMED WOULD THEMSELVES HAVE MADE IN SUCH TERMS?

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>He has by now been reminded too much of Scotland and in desperation he picks up his Bible, only to find that the first man mentioned in the good book is a Scot-King James VI-who authorised its translation. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

<br>ONE  TRANSLATION AMONG MANY  –  THOUGH ADMITTEDLY THE ONLY ONE TO  OMIT THE WORD "NOT" FROM THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT (THOU SHALT COMMIT ADULTERY).

http://www.slipups.com/items/901.html

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>He could take to drink but the Scots make the best in the world. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

YOU MEAN IF YOU EXCLUDE THE "E" FROM THE NAME ?

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>He could take a rifle and end it all but the breech-loading rifle was invented by Captain Patrick Ferguson of Pitfours, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

…..BIT OF A STRETCH THAT ONE: LONG OVERTAKEN AND A FOOTNOTE IN HISTORY.

LOOK ELSEWHERE FOR THE INVENTORS OF TODAY’S GUNS.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blgun.htm

http://inventors.about.com/gi/dynamic/o … owning.htm

http://inventors.about.com/od/cstartinv … volver.htm

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>If he escaped death, he could find himself on an operating table injected with Penicillin discovered by Sir Alexander Fleming of Darvel, Scotland, <br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

NOT SO.

IT WAS ACTUALLY FIRST DISCOVERED BY FRENCHMAN ERNEST DUCHESNE IN 1896.

IT WAS REDISCOVERED IN 1928 BY SIR ALEXANDER FLEMING OF  ST MARYS HOSPITAL LONDON.

HIS REDISCOVERY SIMILARLY THREATENED TO MEAN NOTHING, AND FOR 10 YEARS IT LAY ON THE SHELF UNTIL HOWARD FLOREY  AND ERNST CHAIN DEVELOPED IT, AND ANDREW MOYER PATENTED IT TO GET IT INTO MASS PRODUCTION.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inve … cillin.htm

<br>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>and given Chloroform, and anaesthetic discovered by Sir James Young Simpson, Obstetrician and Gynaecologist of Bathgate, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

NOT SO.

IT WAS DISCOVERED IN JULY 1831 BY AMERICAN PHYSICIAN SAMUEL GUTHRIE (1782-1848); AND INDEPENDENTLY A FEW MONTHS LATER BY FRENCHMAN EUGÈNE SOUBEIRAN (1797-1859) AND JUSTUS VON LIEBIG (1803-73) IN GERMANY. CHLOROFORM WAS NAMED AND CHEMICALLY CHARACTERISED IN 1834 BY JEAN-BAPTISTE DUMAS (1800-84). ITS ANAESTHETIC PROPERTIES WERE NOTED EARLY IN 1847 BY MARIE-JEAN-PIERRE FLOURENS (1794-1867).

http://www.general-anaesthesia.com/imag … roform.htm

WHAT SIMPSON DID WAS TO PERFORM – ON HIMSELF – THE FIRST NARCOSIS USING CHOLOROFORM, AND THEN INTRODUCE ITS USE INTO OBSTETRICS AND OTHER AREAS.

http://www.general-anaesthesia.com/chloroform.html

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>Out of the anaesthetic he would find no comfort in learning that he was as safe as the Bank of England founded by William Paterson of Dumfries, Scotland. <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

YOU CAN HAVE THAT ONE – THOUGH AGAIN IT HAPPENED FAR FROM SCOTLAND AND HE WAS OUT WITHIN A YEAR.

http://www.nndb.com/people/625/000096337/

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>Perhaps his only remaining hope would be to get a transfusion of guid Scottish blood which would entitle him to ask-

Wha’s Like Us? <br><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

There seem to be two sides to Scotland – the  loud ‘Wha’s like us’ mentality ("chip on both shoulders") on the one hand,  and the quietly confident and IMO more attractive ‘We’re a’ Jock Tamson’s bairns’ mentality on the other.  <br>It seems a pity when those of the former persuasion seek to hijack the names and reputations of the latter.

off to get my tin hat now.

best regards

wit<br>

[Jim JTS]

:biggrin:  wit, I think you need to go and lay down for a while as the post from Jane seems to have hit a nerve :biggrin:

Looks like someone will need to go and rewrite the history books now if what you are saying is true, I couldn’t be bothered to click any of your links as I found it all a bit boring, I’m sure we all learned a lot at school but doubt it was anything that you posted, maybe we all need to go back and be re-educated ;)

<br>At the end of the day I’m a proud Scot that is also proud to be British!

[wit]

Hi Jim JTS

The Education Committee of the Scottish Assembly carrying out the Inquiry into the Purposes of Scottish Education has already warned that :

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

…too much attention to Scottish identity could be narrowing…..Scots be brought to see people in other parts of the world as their equals: …..not to be ….patronising

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/busin … 1-02.htm#2

If that signals the end for Wha’s Like Us? and the North-Korean-style history books north of the border which seem to inform it, I’m sure we both agree that can only be a good thing :biggrin:

Best regards

wit<br>

[Jim JTS]

Apologies wit, I’m a bit lost on politics to be honest and couldn’t give a toss, it’s not for me and I also can’t stand this Scotland & England thing but what I do know is that I love Scotland and I’m very proud to be a Scot. ;)

[insomniac]

Don’t get many opportunities to post on TRF nowadays, but might as well add my ha’pporth to this debate.<br>  Kotkijet seemes to exhibit the standard British self-loathing, so common amongst post-Thatcherite, excessively politically-correct Brits who feel that  20th century morals ought to have been understood/exhibited by 16th/17th / 18th century societies. .  It can be difficult to appreciate the  standards/ <br>principles/attitudes of societies of years long ago, but  one has to start by trying to see that the world was a somewhat different place and that what is cruel now was considered by almost all years ago as acceptable.<br> That being so, one has to praise those countries which challenged and changed the perceptions of  their time as to just what was was "acceptable". Thus Kotkijet should be immensley proud of Britain and its  role in the abolition of slavery.  He might do well to study the life of William Wiberforce.<br>Contrary to leftish/Daily Mirror/Guardian history, slavery was practised by black/arab/ african peoples long before the Western European empire builders (France / Spain / Britain) dipped their snouts in the trough. But it was us Brits that first came to question the morality of it and actively do something to stop it. (By the way, contrary to the impression Gordon Brown tried to create at the Labour conference, the prime movers in the abolition of slavery and the use of the Royal Navy to ensure an end to trans-atlantic slavery was wholly Tory, but that’s by the by, but a good example nonetheless of new Labour newsspeak that goes unchallenged by the fawning BBC and ill-educated media commentators).<br> One must accept that in centuries gone by, a country either stood its ground and fought, or got crushed by other nations. Britain could so easily have been overrun by Spain (think Armada) or France (think Napoleon). You either fought and expanded or got invaded. <br>If Britain had never existed, does Kotkijet and the like really think that India / Australia/ New Zealand/ Kenya /Uganda/ Tanganyika/ Rhodesia/Pakistan/Hong Kong / Singapore / Nigeria / USA /Canada etc. would never have been colonised by some other power? Of course not. History shows that of all the "empire" building nations, Britain was probably the most benign/beneficial (read about the effect of French colonisation; take a trip to Rwanda). Those countries listed should be thankful that it was us Brits that colonised them and not the French or Spanish.<br> Britain’s history is one of which we can be immensly proud; not to be so suggests an inability to grasp the prevailing sensibilities/morals of the time. To believe that any one state say, in the 1700’s, should have embraced 20th centuries morals/standards  is laughable.<br> The black nations of the 21st century should pay homage to the U.K. for our enlightenment in changing the worlds attitude to slavery. Western Europe will be forever grateful for our standing up to Nazi Germany.<br> No country with a history as long as ours can avoid shameful episodes, and we have our fair share of those, but overrall, the peoples of the Earth have benefited from British influence.<br>

(Edited by insomniac at 1:13 am on Oct. 9, 2005)

[Jane]

Hello Jim, big stranger. How are you?

[highflyer1]

Insomniac, what distinguishes England from its Western European neighbours is that they have learnt from their "shameful episodes" of the past, whereas we are only too keen to perpetuate them (think Iraq).

[prince regent]

Nowhere can an Englishman turn to escape the ingenuity of the Scots.

i dont know about ingenuity  but the pub down the road is full of scottish drunks

[prince regent]

Quote: from Razeen on 10:50 pm on Oct. 7, 2005[br]Interesting.  I associate Jocks with heroin, glue sniffing and begging at mainline London train stations.<br>

are u scottish then razzie??  as that is what i asscociate you with

[Kotkijet]

Hi Everybody

Colonialism isn’t an exclusive factor in what makes me ashamed to be British, it’s just a very improtant factor.

I think that us having anything to do with (i.e becoming a superpower strictly on the back of) slavery in itself should exonerate any Brit from using the words proud and British in the same sentance. Likewise, I’m sure that if I was born in America, France, Portugal, Spain, Russia, ”Israel”, Italy blah blah blah, I’d probably be writing the same thing – only with the word Britain replaced with any of the above. Having said that, Britain (and many of it’s people) are still very predominant in the global we-shouldn’t-ask-for-forgiveness-from-anybody stakes.

Taking recent times into consideration, most European people who I’ve met have come over here have told me that they are almost disgusted with British peoples lack of giving-a-s**t
in terms of how we care for the environment and our attitude towards America & its wars.

Personally, I’m also upset with the plastic culture we have in this country. We can get whatever we want and whenever we want. What we don’t want, however, is to know how we get our food, our cars, our electronics, our petrol, our limitless landfills, our clothes, our free plastic fu<king toys with our kiddies breakfast, all of those toys which costs most families £100s, even £1000s during christmas only to be thrown into the bin by boxing day – and more importantly – how we manage to sustain that disgusting ritual year in year out.

I know this isn’t just Britain, it’s every other country in the Western world. But so long as Britain promotes the functionalist Consume – Conform – Obey lifestyle which makes life as sh!t as it is, it will be impossible for me to love this country.

[stevedvg]

We can get whatever we want and whenever we want

I know. It’s brilliant, isn’t it.

Best time to be alive – ever.

Steve

[Racing Daily]

I’m not proud to live in the UK.  I am however proud of being a Britain by nationality.  I would just as sooner live in any other democratic country, as that would not change who and what I am.  I couldn’t give a toss about royalism and patriotism.  A person is defined by the quality of his/her demenor, not by which flag he/she stands beside.

[Kotkijet]

Quote: from stevedvg on 4:31 pm on Oct. 10, 2005[br]We can get whatever we want and whenever we want

I know. It’s brilliant, isn’t it.

Best time to be alive – ever.

Steve<br>

Hi Steve

So doesn’t it bother you that the only reason that we get our petrol is because Western states point guns to the heads of those that have the same and threaten mass warfare if we don’t get our way? (Unless it’s Venezuela where we just rely on some evangelicalist nutjob’s urge to assasinate their leader)

Doesn’t it bother you that the only reason we get cheap clothing is because human beings lesser than us work in slave labour conditions on the basis that they’re presented with an economic opportunity?

Doesn’t it bother you that the only reason we get exotic foods is because we force indigenous farmers off their own land because their corrupt governments worship the Dollar / Pound / Yen / Euro?

Doesn’t it bother you that the only reason we view our destructive and wasteful consumption with such indifference is because it will be our ancestors who have deal with global depletion and not us?

The aforementioned arguments apply to anybody fortunate enough to read the same since they are lucky enough to have access to such opinions. (Which the vast majority of those living on the same planet as we do don’t)

But here, I have to ask a personal question to you Steve.

Now during some daft G8 thread on this very forum, you said that the death of a child in the third world (Mozambique to be precise) is much more devastating than a dramatized click of the finger from a celebrity. When you made that comment, I managed to form some kind of respect for you. (Which really is something considering I find it near enough impossible to have any form of compassion for a stranger)

So if you have the time, please could you justify the statement you made on the top of this thread?

Cheers

Simon

[stevedvg]

Hi Simon

I’m surprised it took 9 days for you to take the bait on what was an obvious wind-up tactic.

Personally, I believe we (in the West) are now waking up to the notion that our actions have consequences.

Whether it was 9/11 or the devastation of New Orleans, people are realising that we can’t continue to take from others and overconsume the plante’s resources without payng a price  in the long run.

That’s one of the main reasons I don’t eat meat. I’m<br>fully aware of the toll a meat-based diet puts on the planet.

(though I don’t claim any moral consistency in the area of conservation and it would be easy to find areas where I’m wasteful)

you said that the death of a child in the third world (Mozambique to be precise) is much more devastating than a dramatized click of the finger from a celebrity

Are you sure it was me? I think you might be giving me credit for another person’s words.

Steve

[davidbrady]

There was a radio debate in Ireland on Monday where a journalist from the Guardian basically said that countries who purport to be religious (Muslim or Christian)-based (USA and Middle East are obvious examples) are the very ones with class hierarchies and who show contempt to those "beneath" them on the social ladder while those who are essentially agnostic treat their fellow man far better (e.g. – Scandinavia/Iceland were the examples given)

Good point I thought to myself.

[Author]

Posts