Are you proud to be British?
- Thread starter Marmot
- Start date
Many people (presumably not Daily Mail/Express readers) many think that currently there is more to be proud of in being European than specifically British.
Prey tell me what about being a part of the EU makes you proud or you think might make other people be proud over and above being British?
(by the way we don't stop being Europeans when we leave the EU..... we are leaving a political union not dragging the British Isles to a different continent.)
If you are going to be picky do you actually mean "pray" tell?
Exactly this, which is how I explain it when students ask me about how I feel about being British. With more words, of course, so it kills more lesson time.
I'm very grateful for the opportunities afforded to me thanks to being born there, but I feel no particular sense of pride. Also why I have no intentions of returning any time especially soon; Having been away for 5 years now, it turns out that other countries are also cool. Who knew?
I'm on the phone so typo's are to be expected... You can still answer the question....
Also don't know what you think is 'picky' about the question? Your the one making the unqualified statement.
Caporegime
And I'm proud of the $45 I won from being given a free $5 to gamble with.
I'm I doing it right?
Wut?
So you'd rather live in a place where wealth was distributed less equally, so the poor are as poor the poor in a poorer country. Be alright if you weren't one of the poor eh?
Up until the creation of the EU, Europe has been the most violent, warlike continent for at least the past 500 years. Our obsession with killing each other led to the invention of military technology that allowed us - as a continent - to conquer the world before almost destroying ourselves.
The people of Europe who came together to reject that past should be proud of what they achieved when they created the EU. Putting aside differences and compromising with old enemies is an incredibly difficult task.
Yes I would assuming that someone's personal wealth was at least partly down to the quality and amount of work done by the individual (which is true in the UK).
You can have socialism with an equal sharing of misery somewhere else
erm yeah... and in plenty of set ups like that the poor are partially self selecting through their own lifestyle choices (obviously bad luck plays a role too)
the alternative in that scenario is everyone is poor - how is that a good thing??? Equality for the sake of it? People aren't equal and some people will be living in relative poverty - this is fine IMO and to be expected. Absolute poverty on the other hand isn't good and ought to be tackled - thus we have social security, housing benefit etc..
Caporegime
No. It's utterly arbitrary. I didn't do anything to be born here. I've played no part in the supposedly great history of this land and no part in its current decline. I have nothing to be proud of one way or another.
Associate
Yea, it's not bad being British, far worse places to live/grow up in this messed up World..
Soldato
Environment in what way?
If you mean in history of achievement, then I already acknowledged (in my first post) it was prestige that made the UK the location of research, prestige is gained through history of achievements obviously. I just disagree with your point about it being British. The achievements and credit lies with the individuals not with the country. If you want to talk about where these individuals are from then yes many are British but many are not and most if not all collaborated closely with foreigners, even if it just happened to be in the UK. Science is advanced with paper, pen and a great person attached to the later, there is no special 'environment', the 'environment' is just a place where people of like minds meet.
I think this is as far as this conversation goes. I think the fundamental difference between your view and mine on science is that you are proud of the achievements of others just because of a geographical location and I always thought of those achievements as their own and just as importantly the people they stand on. Also borderless is certainly not a buzzword, the scientific community is not as divided or small as you think...
Just checking the wiki page for the history of science shows you that the UK is just one of many centers of science at ANY point in time. Even the middle east 'Islamic world' was responsible for massive advancements in chemistry, mathematics and developing general scientific methods in the middle ages which they built on the works of the Greeks. European contact with the eastern world led to our scientific revolution across Europe. Fast forward to the years where the UK started becoming a stronger scientific power and you see similar strengthening in the rest of Europe, notable people from a variety of places. Fast forward to the age of enlightenment and more modern science and still advances come from all over by all sorts of people, not just the few countries you mention
Last edited:
You have a rather tenuous grasp on history.... The EU was formed in 1993 following the treaty of Maastricht
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Treaty
NATO has had far more influence on keeping peace in Europe...
I think you should read some Mongol history if you think that Europeans are uniquely a violent people bent on mutual genocide who need some unaccountable federal nanny state to stop them killing each other.
Last edited:
?And I'm proud of the $45 I won from being given a free $5 to gamble with.
I'm I doing it right?
NATO not EU has kept the peace.The new proposed EU army will undermine this.
We was told in the fear campaign that this would never happen, well guess what it is.
And I would include the Cold War in Europe’s violent past even if most of the violence happened on other continents.