First I mainly agree with you: I lived in Britain as in immigrant for a decade, which was preceded by a decade living in The Netherlands, and my opinion of Britons (especially the English, more so their upper middle class and above) is very negative by comparison with my opinion of the Dutch in general and my impression of British society by the time I left was basically “The country of Europe closest to Fascism, only it’s disguised with posh bollocks from posh people with a posh accent”.
However this shit the current government is doing there of arresting people demonstrating against the Genocide as “terrorist supporters” doesn’t have the support of most of the population. Further, 1.5% of the people of a country coming out in a demonstration for the benefit of completely different people and in no way whatsoever for their own personal benefit shows that at last that many people over there have incredibly strong principles.
It doesn’t prove that most people are quite that good people, but it still seems to me that most aren’t quite as bad as being deemed uncivilized.
As I see it, the point you’re making is really that pretty much the entirety of the non-elites there lack a spine, both as people and as a group - hence not doing much to overthrow the power structures of that country - which is not the same as not being civilized people, though as we can see both path lead to similar outcomes in situations like this one.
Frankly, I couldn’t agree more with that view! Countless experiences I’ve had over there speak of subservience towards the upper classes and even towards society in general (the level of concern with “what will other people think of me” there, especially amongst Middle Class women, is quite extreme when compared with, for example, the Dutch) and maybe explains why they’re so good at Theatre: a lot of people over there spend their lives behind a thick complex façade so it’s unsurprising when so many make a hobby and even a profession from it.
Further, they’re relentlessly indoctrinated with both Nationalism and Respect For Authority (in other words, for the elite dynasties) by the local Press, which is maybe why the Brits are actually the least trusting in the local Press of all of Europe.
However, lack of a spine - which in my opinion is mainly a learned trait from growing up in such a society - though not exactly positive in Psychological and Freedom terms, isn’t the same as being uncivilized.
1.5% of the people of a country coming out in a demonstration for the benefit of completely different people and in no way whatsoever for their own personal benefit shows that at last that many people over there have incredibly strong principles.
Yes there are some, but it’s a minority, you have to judge a country by the majority and their government. Because those are the ones representing the country.
There can be exceptions where the people are oppressed, with military force, but UK is NOT such a country.
both as people and as a group
No individuals are individuals and have different traits, this is 100% as the group we call UK.
which is not the same as not being civilized people
I would argue that having something like the house of lords is an expression of being uncivilized as a country.
Again the people consist of individuals, but as a group of people we call UK they definitely have traits in their society that are immoral and to me immoral equals uncivilized.
Now all countries can have elements that are immoral, the problem with UK is that it has elements that are deeply fundamental to their society, much like USA.
Again, your entire point is around them not having succeeded in overthrowing a massive, complex, centuries old, highly resilient power structure which amongst other things indoctrinates them from an early age into compliance and even pride in it.
Things over there are massivelly rigged exactly to stop such a change, an many levels, from the First Past The Post voting system and a Press incredibly consolidated and either in the hands of either billionaires or controlled by the upper class boards, to the whole Public School -> Oxbridge -> Top Level Corporate/Legal/Public Service Position pathway that that makes sure the scions of the elites always end up in control of the rest.
Further, in many ways that structure has been cracking due to internal pressure, though as shown the last time it was really under pressure (following WWII and the return of large numbers of working class people with military trainin) it showed massive flexibility which is how Brits got the NHS, Social Security and even a Gilded Age in the Arts (from all the working class kids that flooded into Music and Theatre) during the 60s and 70s, though all those gains have been slowly been undone, especially since Thatcher got into power.
So you’re basically saying that when peasants don’t assault the fortress they’re uncivilized a logic which ultimately (considering that there is always room for improvement) boils down to “Only Violent Revolution is Civilization”
massive, complex, centuries old, highly resilient power structure
The constitution was supposed to be a living document, that was supposed to be improved upon.
This is the exact opposite of your claim. USA was supposed to improve, Americans just chose not to do that.
Oh sorry for the mixup, mistook it for another line of debate.
But still other countries have had similar systems and changed them. Including my own country, that also used to have a 2 part parliament similar to what UK has now.
That was changed in 1953 after more than a hundred years. Here they were called first and second chamber, and that two part distinction had existed since the 16 hundreds, from before we had democracy.
I don’t see why it would be harder to modernize in UK than other countries. Except for the British exceptionalism, and the British holding almost religiously on to their traditions.
Sure, my country too had a revolution and overthrew a Fascist dictatorship. That doesn’t make it a measure of civilization though.
I’ve lived in several countries of Europe and the web controlling Brits is exceptional in its breadth and depth and quite subtle: for example watch the BBC and look for language that subtly classifies different people as having different implicity trustworthiness, for example how they will report Israeli authorities as “saying” or “stating” things whilst Palestinian authorities “claim” things - this kind of technique is not just used for the Israeli Genocide, it’s used for everything and pretty hard to internally compensate for even if you’re aware of it because it mainly affects you at a subconscious level. Brits are constantly being indoctrinated and manipulated, all done with way more subtlety than run of the mill dictatorships.
Or look at how their level of civil society surveillance as shown by the Snowden Revelations was even worse than the US.
Further, do you know they have a Press censorship scheme called D-Notices? Most Britons don’t even know this.
In many ways Britain is a lot more like an Authoritarian Regime with a bit of performative voting (think Russia) than a Democratic country, only it’s all done way more subtly with far more advanced manipulation techniques as the structures supporting it have been developed over, literally, centuries.
(That’s why I said that I left the country thinking it was basically the closest to Fascism we have in Europe, just disguised as posh)
Yet plenty of people over there still have very strong principles to the point that 1.5% of the population went out and demonstrated purely for their principles and not at all their own personal good and people are still going out and risking being arrested by the government as “terrorist supporters” for demonstrating against a Genocide that doesn’t actually affect them personally.
Granted, at the same time there is also a large fraction of the population who are complete cunts, from Financiers in the City and the Political class, to Racist Nationalists.
Don’t get me wrong: British Society itself is quite backwards as European nations go in many things, it’s just that a significant fraction of the population do hold personal humanist values and are willing to at least go out and demonstrate and even face the authorities for them. I compare it with my own country - Portugal - whose society isn’t quite as ill (it has its problems, mainly different ones) but activism for actual principle around here is almost non-existent (sure, people will demonstrate and even strike for their own personal good, but for example a far smaller fraction of people was demonstrating against the Israeli Genocide here than in Britain) and don’t get me started on just hugely unlikely people around here are to do thinks like avoiding having a car for Ecological reasons.
PS: In fact, now that I think about it, a lot of the reason why I think that Revolutionary Capability is not the same as Civilization is the observation on my own country of how people can be perfectly capable of fighting for themselves to the point of overthrowing a dictatorship and yet won’t at all fight for others. In my view, “civilization” must include fighting against certain things happenning to anybody and only just fighting against those things happenning to oneself is merely Survival.
I must admit I am not nearly as informed about Portugal as I am about Northern Europe. But despite that I know they have some pretty strong policies protecting the weaker parts of civilization and workers, as misunderstood as they may sometimes be compared to the Scandinavian model that seems to work better.
The Portuguese may not be protesting as much as the Brits, but I don’t think the Portuguese system is as inherently bad as is the case for UK. In Portugal most things can be improved through the democratic process. Denmark is also a country that has a very low degree of protests, and I believe that coincides with being one of the best democracies in the word. If it works don’t fix it.
I think we differ mainly in that I think that in this era Civilization must be broader than just “Doing what’s better for us”.
So in that sense the Scandinavian model of governance by itself (absent all else), whilst more civilized than most others, isn’t enough for Civilization - there needs to be some kind of broad holding of Universal Humanist Principles rather than merelly just the nation treating its own citizens well.
By that metric and looking at the awful position of Denmark in regards to the Israeli Genocide and even in things like pushing for broad civil society surveillance at the EU level in the form of Chat Control, Denmark is NOT a civilized country, even if it’s better for its own citizens than the vast majority of countries are for theirs.
First I mainly agree with you: I lived in Britain as in immigrant for a decade, which was preceded by a decade living in The Netherlands, and my opinion of Britons (especially the English, more so their upper middle class and above) is very negative by comparison with my opinion of the Dutch in general and my impression of British society by the time I left was basically “The country of Europe closest to Fascism, only it’s disguised with posh bollocks from posh people with a posh accent”.
However this shit the current government is doing there of arresting people demonstrating against the Genocide as “terrorist supporters” doesn’t have the support of most of the population. Further, 1.5% of the people of a country coming out in a demonstration for the benefit of completely different people and in no way whatsoever for their own personal benefit shows that at last that many people over there have incredibly strong principles.
It doesn’t prove that most people are quite that good people, but it still seems to me that most aren’t quite as bad as being deemed uncivilized.
As I see it, the point you’re making is really that pretty much the entirety of the non-elites there lack a spine, both as people and as a group - hence not doing much to overthrow the power structures of that country - which is not the same as not being civilized people, though as we can see both path lead to similar outcomes in situations like this one.
Frankly, I couldn’t agree more with that view! Countless experiences I’ve had over there speak of subservience towards the upper classes and even towards society in general (the level of concern with “what will other people think of me” there, especially amongst Middle Class women, is quite extreme when compared with, for example, the Dutch) and maybe explains why they’re so good at Theatre: a lot of people over there spend their lives behind a thick complex façade so it’s unsurprising when so many make a hobby and even a profession from it.
Further, they’re relentlessly indoctrinated with both Nationalism and Respect For Authority (in other words, for the elite dynasties) by the local Press, which is maybe why the Brits are actually the least trusting in the local Press of all of Europe.
However, lack of a spine - which in my opinion is mainly a learned trait from growing up in such a society - though not exactly positive in Psychological and Freedom terms, isn’t the same as being uncivilized.
Yes there are some, but it’s a minority, you have to judge a country by the majority and their government. Because those are the ones representing the country.
There can be exceptions where the people are oppressed, with military force, but UK is NOT such a country.
No individuals are individuals and have different traits, this is 100% as the group we call UK.
I would argue that having something like the house of lords is an expression of being uncivilized as a country.
Again the people consist of individuals, but as a group of people we call UK they definitely have traits in their society that are immoral and to me immoral equals uncivilized.
Now all countries can have elements that are immoral, the problem with UK is that it has elements that are deeply fundamental to their society, much like USA.
Again, your entire point is around them not having succeeded in overthrowing a massive, complex, centuries old, highly resilient power structure which amongst other things indoctrinates them from an early age into compliance and even pride in it.
Things over there are massivelly rigged exactly to stop such a change, an many levels, from the First Past The Post voting system and a Press incredibly consolidated and either in the hands of either billionaires or controlled by the upper class boards, to the whole Public School -> Oxbridge -> Top Level Corporate/Legal/Public Service Position pathway that that makes sure the scions of the elites always end up in control of the rest.
Further, in many ways that structure has been cracking due to internal pressure, though as shown the last time it was really under pressure (following WWII and the return of large numbers of working class people with military trainin) it showed massive flexibility which is how Brits got the NHS, Social Security and even a Gilded Age in the Arts (from all the working class kids that flooded into Music and Theatre) during the 60s and 70s, though all those gains have been slowly been undone, especially since Thatcher got into power.
So you’re basically saying that when peasants don’t assault the fortress they’re uncivilized a logic which ultimately (considering that there is always room for improvement) boils down to “Only Violent Revolution is Civilization”
Lets agree to disagree on that.
The constitution was supposed to be a living document, that was supposed to be improved upon.
This is the exact opposite of your claim. USA was supposed to improve, Americans just chose not to do that.
We’re talking about Britain, not the US.
Britain doesn’t even have a written constitution.
Oh sorry for the mixup, mistook it for another line of debate.
But still other countries have had similar systems and changed them. Including my own country, that also used to have a 2 part parliament similar to what UK has now.
That was changed in 1953 after more than a hundred years. Here they were called first and second chamber, and that two part distinction had existed since the 16 hundreds, from before we had democracy.
I don’t see why it would be harder to modernize in UK than other countries. Except for the British exceptionalism, and the British holding almost religiously on to their traditions.
Sure, my country too had a revolution and overthrew a Fascist dictatorship. That doesn’t make it a measure of civilization though.
I’ve lived in several countries of Europe and the web controlling Brits is exceptional in its breadth and depth and quite subtle: for example watch the BBC and look for language that subtly classifies different people as having different implicity trustworthiness, for example how they will report Israeli authorities as “saying” or “stating” things whilst Palestinian authorities “claim” things - this kind of technique is not just used for the Israeli Genocide, it’s used for everything and pretty hard to internally compensate for even if you’re aware of it because it mainly affects you at a subconscious level. Brits are constantly being indoctrinated and manipulated, all done with way more subtlety than run of the mill dictatorships.
Or look at how their level of civil society surveillance as shown by the Snowden Revelations was even worse than the US.
Further, do you know they have a Press censorship scheme called D-Notices? Most Britons don’t even know this.
In many ways Britain is a lot more like an Authoritarian Regime with a bit of performative voting (think Russia) than a Democratic country, only it’s all done way more subtly with far more advanced manipulation techniques as the structures supporting it have been developed over, literally, centuries.
(That’s why I said that I left the country thinking it was basically the closest to Fascism we have in Europe, just disguised as posh)
Yet plenty of people over there still have very strong principles to the point that 1.5% of the population went out and demonstrated purely for their principles and not at all their own personal good and people are still going out and risking being arrested by the government as “terrorist supporters” for demonstrating against a Genocide that doesn’t actually affect them personally.
Granted, at the same time there is also a large fraction of the population who are complete cunts, from Financiers in the City and the Political class, to Racist Nationalists.
Don’t get me wrong: British Society itself is quite backwards as European nations go in many things, it’s just that a significant fraction of the population do hold personal humanist values and are willing to at least go out and demonstrate and even face the authorities for them. I compare it with my own country - Portugal - whose society isn’t quite as ill (it has its problems, mainly different ones) but activism for actual principle around here is almost non-existent (sure, people will demonstrate and even strike for their own personal good, but for example a far smaller fraction of people was demonstrating against the Israeli Genocide here than in Britain) and don’t get me started on just hugely unlikely people around here are to do thinks like avoiding having a car for Ecological reasons.
PS: In fact, now that I think about it, a lot of the reason why I think that Revolutionary Capability is not the same as Civilization is the observation on my own country of how people can be perfectly capable of fighting for themselves to the point of overthrowing a dictatorship and yet won’t at all fight for others. In my view, “civilization” must include fighting against certain things happenning to anybody and only just fighting against those things happenning to oneself is merely Survival.
I must admit I am not nearly as informed about Portugal as I am about Northern Europe. But despite that I know they have some pretty strong policies protecting the weaker parts of civilization and workers, as misunderstood as they may sometimes be compared to the Scandinavian model that seems to work better.
The Portuguese may not be protesting as much as the Brits, but I don’t think the Portuguese system is as inherently bad as is the case for UK. In Portugal most things can be improved through the democratic process. Denmark is also a country that has a very low degree of protests, and I believe that coincides with being one of the best democracies in the word. If it works don’t fix it.
But apart from that, I agree with you.
I think we differ mainly in that I think that in this era Civilization must be broader than just “Doing what’s better for us”.
So in that sense the Scandinavian model of governance by itself (absent all else), whilst more civilized than most others, isn’t enough for Civilization - there needs to be some kind of broad holding of Universal Humanist Principles rather than merelly just the nation treating its own citizens well.
By that metric and looking at the awful position of Denmark in regards to the Israeli Genocide and even in things like pushing for broad civil society surveillance at the EU level in the form of Chat Control, Denmark is NOT a civilized country, even if it’s better for its own citizens than the vast majority of countries are for theirs.