Happy Birthday. (I think)
Andrew has written a great post over at ATW about the birthday of Great Britain.
"This, the 300th anniversary of the first Act ofUnion, should allow us to think about the UK and what it has achieved. It once ruled the world and, as recently as the end of the First World War, was considered the only global superpower. It created the largest Empire the world has ever seen and, in contrast to many other imperial ventures by our European neighbours, did far more good than ever it did harm to the countries which submitted to its control (whatever you may think about the principle of empire, that is a fact). Today, there is nothing equivalent to the Commonwealth for the former conquests of France, Spain or the Netherlands.
Not only did the United Kingdom build much of the infrastructure in its imperial backyard, it also forged great and significant ties with countries never under its colonial stewardship.
The two best examples of this are Argentina and Chile, where the railways, roads, agriculture and naval strengths of those two countries were created and built by the British - not the Spanish. Even as recently as the early 20th century, more people in Argentina spoke English and Italian than Spanish.
In the 21st Century, the UK is still a global player and is one of only 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council. It is Europe's (excluding Russia) foremost military power and has ties to the United States unequalled by any other country. The importance of this alliance cannot be underestimated for anyone who has lived through WW2 or has seen the global ventures undertaken by ourselves and the Americans since that time.."
Great stuff.
Another way of looking at it of course is to think that without the socialists in the land of William Wallace ('braveheart and hero of scotland - hammer of the english and scotlands greatest patriot!!' etc etc etc la di daa) England wouldnt be run by Nu Labour. Ever. As demonstrated beautifully top left by the 2005 election map which doesnt much change from one general election to the next.
posted by Alison @ 10:03 pm
7 Comments:
I've been reading Churchill's six volume history of the Second World War and I cannot help but be struck by his descriptions of the strong bonds of fellowship that ALL of us English speaking people's have.
And we on this side of the water are particularly proud to have our former colonial master as our most stalwart friend in good and bad times.
We've been greatly worried about you folks of late though. We fear you've succumb once again to the "peace at any price" and appeasement mindset which enabled great evil to nearly triumph in the last century.
Heck, we're dealing with the same problem over here too. Let's hope the refusal to see the danger doesn't reach the level it did in the late 1930's.
Either way, I'm reminded of what FDR's point man, Harry Hopkins told Churchill ten months before the U.S. entered the war:
'Whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God.' Hopkins paused, then added quietly, 'Even to the end.'
We are one.
A British American union created Churchill himself, he is our shared hero, and one of the greatest this world has seen.
Why so much hatred for us now?
I'm sorry Bush is so ???? I swear I did not vote for him, it's not my fault. And no one ever listens to me, I wonder why I even try anymore.
"I'm sorry Bush is so ????"
What? Visionary? Steadfast? Dedicated to counteracting evil?
European displeasure with the U.S. is nothing new. If you recall, the euroweanies felt the same way about Reagan. Remember the Greenham Common women?
This anti-U.S. feeling is nothing more than an emotional outburst mostly generated by those with strong appeasement impulses. You know, the "peace at any price" crowd whose stupidity forced the world into World War II and cost up to sixty million lives.
Bush, like Reagan, is countering evil and hopefully avoiding a larger more violent and deadly conflict.
So naturally, the left hates him.
I'm not part of the "left".............
Peace at any price?
no one gets it do they?
I'm not part of the "left".............
Peace at any price?
no one gets it do they?
God the Greenham common lot (?!) were NOT representative of anyone. I can remember taking the piss out of them at school at age 11.
Neither am i. Im no great fan of Bush but i was pro Iraq etc. I do think i get what you mean Tu.
The election map is a bit misleading. Actually, Labour got more seats in England than then Tories (although 800,000 less votes). The map looks so blue for England because Tory seats are rural/suburban and so are larger than densely-populated urban Labour seats.
The Tories got more votes than Labour, not because their support was higher across the country, but because the turnout in safe Tory suburban seats was 70%+ and the turnout in Labour urban seats was 50% or less. Thus, winning Labour MPs won 15,000 to 10,000 votes or something like that and winning Tories got 20-25,000 votes.
So, the right-wing narrative of England having a Labour government purely because of Scotland is false - a bit of a myth, ignoring the fact that lots of people in the North of England don't really like the Tories and (those of them that vote) helped Labour get almost 300 English seats.
Post a Comment
<< Home