Utopia Talk / Politics / sebland

Sam Adams rank	Wed Feb 25 18:19:41 https://x.com/DefiantLs/status/2026658450638270574?s=20 British veteran: "Rows and rows of white tombs for what? So many of my friends died. A country of today? No, I'm sorry. The sacrifice wasn't worth the result."
Rugian rank	Wed Feb 25 20:26:23 Comparing the UK of 1926 to today would be quite the exercise in contrasts. You think the average British person back then would be happy to know that the Isles would be Islamified by Asians within a few generations' time? Lol
Rugian rank	Wed Feb 25 20:31:24 "We are barbarians living in the ruins of a far superior civilization"
Sam Adams rank	Wed Feb 25 20:44:18 The old Brits would be pretty impressed by advancements in autos, jets, home appliances, and especially computers. They would be disgusted by the increasing crime, wokeism, the fact that the UK was responsible for 0.0 of that tech advancement, and that the empire is totally gone. They would be pretty surprised to see that while all that tech has advanced so much. medicine has not, and that the UK is still using trains. Probably be pretty psyched to see bikinis in public, at least the dudes.
Seb rank	Thu Feb 26 00:36:15 Computers and jets both being British inventions, for example. Sam, you really need to stop reading far right propaganda. What you think the "Brits of 1926" would say is: a. A projection by you of what you imagine then to be, a coopted heritage to give ballast to your lack of identity. b. Ignores the heterodoxy - there were Brits arguing for the equality of other ethnic groups in the 18th century, which is why slavery was abolished. Look at the levellers and the diggers and other radical movements of the 17th century - a big part of *your* American heritage as many fled to that US - which you completely ignore in favour of the prevailing values of the US South. It's a decidedly pick and mix view of history.
Rugian rank	Thu Feb 26 00:55:52 I'm sorry...we ARE talking about the same empire that allowed tens of millions of people to starve to death because violating the doctrine of laissez-faire economics would have been an even bigger travesty, right? And the clue is in the heterodox label...you are talking about the dissidents, the people who never made it into power. They are irrelevant. Also, Massachusetts Bay was established by the Puritans, who ran the colony as a virtually independent religious theocracy in the service of a Protestant God, free of the dual scourages of Catholicism and Parliament's Navigation Acts... ...that IS my history as far as I'm concerned.
murder rank	Thu Feb 26 00:58:15 "They would be disgusted by the increasing crime ..." Has crime increased? -
murder rank	Thu Feb 26 00:59:33 Or is this the same sort of increase that the right in the US perceives as the crime rate has been dropping for decades? -
Sam Adams rank	Thu Feb 26 02:27:16 "Computers and jets both being British inventions, for example." Perhaps you can point out the British computer company? Or the British jet company that isn't tiny? Lmao.
Seb rank	Thu Feb 26 02:36:18 Rugian: Yes, the same Empire that massacred white English people at Peterloo. You are very confused if you think the actions of the state indicates some kind of Gestalt mindset that represents "the British people". Imperial policy was as much built on class as it was on race. An Indian prince was recognised as far more equal to a British lord than a factory worker in Manchester. You and Sam trying to compress everything into a simplistic story of universal white supremacy suddenly undone by post war wokeism is ahistorical American Right bullshit. It's Disneyfied fiction to tell trite little origin myth stories to shore up your own identities and philosophies lack of deep roots. Radical liberalism is as much, arguably more so, a part of the British history than notions of racial superiority. Abolitionism didn't just come spring from nowhere. The french and the Americans talk of their liberalising revolutions, ignoring the fact the English had had two by that point. "the people who never made it into power" The new model army didn't make it into power is a heck of a take Rugian. They cut the kings fucking head off, executed half the aristocracy, abolished parliament and had Cromwell as a dictator until people thought it had got a bit much and had the first crack at modern English version of constitutional monarchy before refining it in 1689. It is also a heck of an argument to make given the political triumph of Abolitionists in the 19th century as a popular moral crusade, and how the Liberals and then Labour pushed through reforms that first explicitly had colonial subjects equal rights in law and then Labours dismantling of empire. Were these policies of a govts in power with broad backing? You've gone done a no true Scotsman fallacy. Liberal British thought rejecting race superiority is either a minority factions not in power, or not really British all if it is. These things didn't come out nowhere, imposed on a British people entirely otherwise made up of Sams. They were popular. The problem is, as products of any entirely different society that's only now in the latter stages of creating a class system, you can't really understand how class is and has always been a bigger factor than race here. Genuinely, you don't get it, and can't get it. "Massachusetts Bay was established by the Puritans" Indeed. The Scrooby Congregation - an extreme group of dissenters who wanted to ban pubs, reintroduce sumptuary laws and maypole dancing (not a million miles from modern Islamic theocrats take) effectively exiled to Leiden and then allowed to return on condition of settling plantations in the Americas. This is exactly my point. The likes of Vance and Sam and others that portray the modern UK as having diverged from the pure strain culture still represented in the US are talking absolute hogwash. The earliest English settlers were a mix of various groups most of whom were divergent from mainstream English cultural norms; and even the stories you now tell about them are mostly ex-post-facto identity myths. E.g. "the pilgrims wanted freedom so they fled to America" (the pilgrims wanted to create a stifling society where local churches had overweening authority to impose religious rules on their parish that massively curtail peoples freedom; and they did not flee, they got exiled because they were making a nuisance of themselves trying to set up theocracy.) But even that story is a myth. The puritans were only one faction of dissenters. When the levellers and the diggers were supposed, many went into exile in the American colonies and their ideas (particularly the levellers) influenced the political thoughts of the US founding fathers. So to go back to Sam's question, what would a Brit plucked from the 1926 think about the UK today? It depends entirely on which Brit you plucked. A trade unionist might have very different perspective than Sam's imagined Christian Nationalist, 1926 being the year of the general strike - a consideration that doesn't even come into mind because he knows fuck all about actual UK history. They'd likely look at modern labour laws, minimum wages, guaranteed holidays, working hour limits - all the things he hates, as undreamed of successes. He might agree with Sam about all the immigrants - but not because they are lazy and inferior but because they saw the use of foreign labour as outcompeting on jobs. Meanwhile the sort of person Sam identifies with, upper middle class professional with capital were the ones arguing strongly for immigration to fill labour market gaps created by the loss of a huge fraction of working aged men in ww1. If you asked either about "Islamification" would likely have been greeted with a blank stare. That's a modern paranoia that would have had relatively little salience at that time. The Muslim brotherhood and fundamentalist islam as a political force wouldn't be founded until 1928; and while Christianity was a default and church going still common cultural reflex, the population wasn't particularly devout - and in two generations most of our 1926 Brits kids and grandkids will only step inside a church for major life events. Not because of dark sinister forces, but just the general secularisation of society. Murder: No, it has not, it is in fact lower than at any time in UK history.
Seb rank	Thu Feb 26 02:41:02 Sam: You are confused between manufacturing things and inventing things. If we use your definition, most modern tech is a Chinese invention. Roles Royce holds 33% of global wide body jet market Vs GE's 50%.
Seb rank	Thu Feb 26 02:43:35 Also something like 99% of phones use ARM licensed tech, and one third of all processors. Again, not small.
murder rank	Thu Feb 26 02:50:32 "No, it has not, it is in fact lower than at any time in UK history." Even with all the colored people? -
Sam Adams rank	Thu Feb 26 05:02:52 "Yes, the same Empire that massacred white English people at Peterloo." Oh wait you mean a minor police action against rioting plebs that killed something like 15 people that no one has ever heard of? Lmao. Such importance. "You are confused between manufacturing things and inventing things." Well I could just point out how retarded you would have to be to think you invented either the jet engine or the computer(at most you could claim about 1% of the computer and perhaps a third of the jet engine, which is itself just a part of the modern jet plane), but decided that a more practical real world examination would be easier for your limited mind to understand. "Roles Royce holds 33% of global wide body jet market Vs GE's 50%." Lol don't look up narrow bodies. "it is in fact lower than at any time in UK history" Blatant lies https://ic...ction/_124893412_rapechart.jpg Your own far left BBC even disagrees with you.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: