Doctor Who Ratings Rise in the US, Fall in the UK

[F'Angus]

Matt Smith is a Great Doctor...I don't however like River Song, I liked her in the Library but she's REALLY annoying me now...
Didn't particularly like the new episode though, just loads of talking...

Although it's good to see Badger from Firefly getting a role.

 

[JDKJ]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

 

[Sutter Cane]

Hey guys remmember when this thread was about DOCTOR WHO? Is it TOO MUCH to expect people to talk about DOCTOR WHO in an article about DOCTOR WHO, and not get int a 70 BILLION post debate about POLITICS? Isn't there another forum on this site for that? Cause I think there is.

 

[Yankeedoodles]

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

Dunno about those guys, but I lived in America and the UK (and Australia as well) and I'd easily say that on a ground, personal level, the Brits are by far the least nationalistic... that is, until foreigners try and move in on their territory (ironic much?)

Most Brits don't own a flag, nor would dream of ever waving one outside of a football match, and close to none know the national anthem. Considering in America that's basic knowledge, and they even brainwa... I mean, require children to salute a flag every morning in school, while reeling off some diatribe about how good it is to live in a slightly different location to everyone else, the Brits aren't nationalist at all. They prove you can be a small minded bigot, racist and xenophobe, while still being self depreciating about your own country. Quite a feat.

I'm not nationalist, and I think that the concept is ridiculous. However, you can't accuse the vast majority of Brits of being nationalist when we aren't, especially compared to America. You guys even made up your own sports, because you didn't want to play with the rest of the world

Well I and I would wager to bet most Americans have no idea what the middle of the Star Spangled Banner is. We just sort of mumble it when it's played at sporting events. But looking at the sum total of this thread, can you honestly say that this does not reek of British nationalism?

Speaking to American nationalism specifically, I can understand why it may be annoying to a number of people in other countries. It annoys me on occasion. But, sadly, there are a number of social issues still very present in this country which nationalism is quite effective at overcoming. Hopefully we'll push past those some day but until then I'm afraid the international community will simply have to try to tolerate it.

No, I wouldn't say this thread reeks of British nationalism. I think it reeks of slight xenophobia, but more than that, it reeks of boyish competition.

The thing is, (and this is what America is going to need to put up with), the US has entered the homes of every western country, in its media, its products and its way of life. It's like America has infiltrated us all. It's like we all know you personally, and don't realise that you are a very different nation, and are as foreign as any other country can be, especially in your personal attitudes. And all of this feeling of familiarity goes double for us English speaking countries - we don't even get a dubbed version of your stuff, it's not necessary. You speak to us on a daily basis in your own voices, in our very homes, in our cinema, in what we eat or drink, and in how we now live our lives. And so that makes us brothers. Unfortunately, you're the brother who got all the breaks in life. WE are the runty one who can never get the girl. So every time we get a success, yeah we rub it in your faces. Like this thread. I think we're entitled to. We are mass consumers of what you export, so it's nice to be appreciated too. Add to that general British competitiveness, and the fact that most Brits are kinda rude as a way of life, and you get threads like this. It isn't a nationalist thing, it's more of a society kinda thing. We aren't like this because we love Britain, we're like this because, frankly, Britain doesn't have much worth loving any more, and so we take full advantage of our successes. We'll still be drinking Coca Cola tomorrow, and watching awful remakes of good foreign language films, but allow us Dr Who today

EDIT: Ask any Brit in person the second line of the anthem, and look at their confused faces... it's not sung in schools, nor taught. Most schools won't own a British flag at all. What's the point? It's a difficult comparison, being very different countries, but you can't compare English nationalism, as it doesn't exist. The BNP and EDL and that a just fronts for racist parties. They don't give a shit about "nationalism" or patriotism.

Hmm... those are some very interesting points. Up until I took a trip to Europe a few years ago I didn't realize how omnipresent America is in much the rest of the world. I went to see Canterbury cathedral and there was a beautiful entrance arch for it and on either side of it were a McDonalds and a Starbucks. While I was in Germany about to go to sleep I watched nearly the entire movie of Herbie the Love Bug. I guess I had just assumed that everything would be so different over there. And I guess I was surprised and a little disappointed. If you don't watch the news here it is very easy to forget that the rest of the world exists.

Still, it honestly sounds like you're describing nationalism to me. If Dr. Who is something that you're proud of simply because it was made in Britain, by Brits, using British funds then what you're feeling is nationalist pride. Nationalism doesn't need to manifest in relation to overt national symbols like the flag or what have you.

Edit: And contrary to what I said before that's not necessarily a bad thing. I've really enjoyed the Dr. Who that I've seen and I think it's an excellent diplomat representing British culture the world over.

 

[Sutter Cane]

I guess it is to much to expect the thread to stay on topic then.

 

[JDKJ]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

Very mature response.

Can't beat em, throw strawmen at em I suppose?

And I already said I find it hard to drop things.

Especially to people like you.

It's a trick I learned from you. Turnaround is fair play, Mr. I Know More Than You About UK Politics Because I Live There and I'm Keenly Interested. With your all fancy degrees from the London School of Cretinomics.

 

[Sutter Cane]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

Very mature response.

Can't beat em, throw strawmen at em I suppose?

And I already said I find it hard to drop things.

Especially to people like you.

It's a trick I learned from you. Turnaround is fair play, Mr. I Know More Than You About UK Politics Because I live There and I'm Keenly Interested. With your all fancy degrees from the London School of Cretinomics.

Ya know what I'm going to ask this one more time? What does ANY of this have to do with doctor who or tv ratings? Nothing? didn't think so. You'e dominating a thread with an off topic argument. If this really had ANYTHING to do with the article I'd be less pissed, but it doesn't. Why don't you two go and start a new topic or resolve this via PMS and leave the thread for people who are actually interested in talking about doctor who and its ratings.

 

[Xpwn3ntial]

Okay, mods? Can we lock this thread please? Because these two are going to go at it for quite some time at this rate.

OT: I didn't see that episode of Dr. Who but then again I have a hard time keeping track of when it's on.

 

[zHellas]

I guess it is to much to expect the thread to stay on topic then.

Well, when the thread has mention of a controversial topic (like a tiny mention), it'll always be derailed into something else.

 

[JDKJ]

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

Dunno about those guys, but I lived in America and the UK (and Australia as well) and I'd easily say that on a ground, personal level, the Brits are by far the least nationalistic... that is, until foreigners try and move in on their territory (ironic much?)

Most Brits don't own a flag, nor would dream of ever waving one outside of a football match, and close to none know the national anthem. Considering in America that's basic knowledge, and they even brainwa... I mean, require children to salute a flag every morning in school, while reeling off some diatribe about how good it is to live in a slightly different location to everyone else, the Brits aren't nationalist at all. They prove you can be a small minded bigot, racist and xenophobe, while still being self depreciating about your own country. Quite a feat.

I'm not nationalist, and I think that the concept is ridiculous. However, you can't accuse the vast majority of Brits of being nationalist when we aren't, especially compared to America. You guys even made up your own sports, because you didn't want to play with the rest of the world

Well I and I would wager to bet most Americans have no idea what the middle of the Star Spangled Banner is. We just sort of mumble it when it's played at sporting events. But looking at the sum total of this thread, can you honestly say that this does not reek of British nationalism?

Speaking to American nationalism specifically, I can understand why it may be annoying to a number of people in other countries. It annoys me on occasion. But, sadly, there are a number of social issues still very present in this country which nationalism is quite effective at overcoming. Hopefully we'll push past those some day but until then I'm afraid the international community will simply have to try to tolerate it.

No, I wouldn't say this thread reeks of British nationalism. I think it reeks of slight xenophobia, but more than that, it reeks of boyish competition.

The thing is, (and this is what America is going to need to put up with), the US has entered the homes of every western country, in its media, its products and its way of life. It's like America has infiltrated us all. It's like we all know you personally, and don't realise that you are a very different nation, and are as foreign as any other country can be, especially in your personal attitudes. And all of this feeling of familiarity goes double for us English speaking countries - we don't even get a dubbed version of your stuff, it's not necessary. You speak to us on a daily basis in your own voices, in our very homes, in our cinema, in what we eat or drink, and in how we now live our lives. And so that makes us brothers. Unfortunately, you're the brother who got all the breaks in life. WE are the runty one who can never get the girl. So every time we get a success, yeah we rub it in your faces. Like this thread. I think we're entitled to. We are mass consumers of what you export, so it's nice to be appreciated too. Add to that general British competitiveness, and the fact that most Brits are kinda rude as a way of life, and you get threads like this. It isn't a nationalist thing, it's more of a society kinda thing. We aren't like this because we love Britain, we're like this because, frankly, Britain doesn't have much worth loving any more, and so we take full advantage of our successes. We'll still be drinking Coca Cola tomorrow, and watching awful remakes of good foreign language films, but allow us Dr Who today

EDIT: Ask any Brit in person the second line of the anthem, and look at their confused faces... it's not sung in schools, nor taught. Most schools won't own a British flag at all. What's the point? It's a difficult comparison, being very different countries, but you can't compare English nationalism, as it doesn't exist. The BNP and EDL and that a just fronts for racist parties. They don't give a shit about "nationalism" or patriotism.

Hmm... those are some very interesting points. Up until I took a trip to Europe a few years ago I didn't realize how omnipresent America is in much the rest of the world. I went to see Canterbury cathedral and there was a beautiful entrance arch for it and on either side of it were a McDonalds and a Starbucks. While I was in Germany about to go to sleep I watched nearly the entire movie of Herbie the Love Bug. I guess I had just assumed that everything would be so different over there. And I guess I was surprised and a little disappointed. If you don't watch the news here it is very easy to forget that the rest of the world exists.

Still, it honestly sounds like you're describing nationalism to me. If Dr. Who is something that you're proud of simply because it was made in Britain, by Brits, using British funds then what you're feeling is nationalist pride. Nationalism doesn't need to manifest in relation to overt national symbols like the flag or what have you.

And the fact remains that whatever you want to call it --nationalism, isolationism, protectionism, or whateverism -- there is a fairly strong and virulent resistance among a significant population of Britons --be they supporters of the BNP or not -- to immigration and immigrants, particularly those from East Asian and Middle Eastern countries. I think beyond doubt that groups like the BNP have seized upon that sentiment and have played it well to their advantage.

Does this mean that we judge each and every Briton by this? Of course not. No more than every American should be judged by Arizona's Governor Jan Brewer and her use of wide-spread anti-immigrant sentiment in Arizona for her own selfish purposes.

But what you won't find me doing is trying to claim that the Brewers and her ilk don't exist and don't inform both the political debate and policy. That'd be pure bullshit on my part.

 

[Stephanos132]

Well, I don't know about everyone else, but the last season of Doctor Who fizzed out pretty quickly (what with destroying the Angels menace and mystique somewhat, NEW TOY DALEKS, some pretty silly plot 'twists' (daleks allying with other species? Do me a favour)), so I can't say I was over-enthusiastic about the new series (missed the showing altogether in fact). That and the lovely weather, for me anyway.

 

[JDKJ]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

Very mature response.

Can't beat em, throw strawmen at em I suppose?

And I already said I find it hard to drop things.

Especially to people like you.

It's a trick I learned from you. Turnaround is fair play, Mr. I Know More Than You About UK Politics Because I live There and I'm Keenly Interested. With your all fancy degrees from the London School of Cretinomics.

Ya know what I'm going to ask this one more time? What does ANY of this have to do with doctor who or tv ratings? Nothing? didn't think so. You'e dominating a thread with an off topic argument. If this really had ANYTHING to do with the article I'd be less pissed, but it doesn't. Why don't you two go and start a new topic or resolve this via PMS and leave the thread for people who are actually interested in talking about doctor who and its ratings.

Why don't you ask your boy Abandon the same thing? He's just as guilty as I am. Picking sides and playing favorites?

 

[Verlander]

Spoiler: Previous Conversation

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

Dunno about those guys, but I lived in America and the UK (and Australia as well) and I'd easily say that on a ground, personal level, the Brits are by far the least nationalistic... that is, until foreigners try and move in on their territory (ironic much?)

Most Brits don't own a flag, nor would dream of ever waving one outside of a football match, and close to none know the national anthem. Considering in America that's basic knowledge, and they even brainwa... I mean, require children to salute a flag every morning in school, while reeling off some diatribe about how good it is to live in a slightly different location to everyone else, the Brits aren't nationalist at all. They prove you can be a small minded bigot, racist and xenophobe, while still being self depreciating about your own country. Quite a feat.

I'm not nationalist, and I think that the concept is ridiculous. However, you can't accuse the vast majority of Brits of being nationalist when we aren't, especially compared to America. You guys even made up your own sports, because you didn't want to play with the rest of the world

Well I and I would wager to bet most Americans have no idea what the middle of the Star Spangled Banner is. We just sort of mumble it when it's played at sporting events. But looking at the sum total of this thread, can you honestly say that this does not reek of British nationalism?

Speaking to American nationalism specifically, I can understand why it may be annoying to a number of people in other countries. It annoys me on occasion. But, sadly, there are a number of social issues still very present in this country which nationalism is quite effective at overcoming. Hopefully we'll push past those some day but until then I'm afraid the international community will simply have to try to tolerate it.

No, I wouldn't say this thread reeks of British nationalism. I think it reeks of slight xenophobia, but more than that, it reeks of boyish competition.

The thing is, (and this is what America is going to need to put up with), the US has entered the homes of every western country, in its media, its products and its way of life. It's like America has infiltrated us all. It's like we all know you personally, and don't realise that you are a very different nation, and are as foreign as any other country can be, especially in your personal attitudes. And all of this feeling of familiarity goes double for us English speaking countries - we don't even get a dubbed version of your stuff, it's not necessary. You speak to us on a daily basis in your own voices, in our very homes, in our cinema, in what we eat or drink, and in how we now live our lives. And so that makes us brothers. Unfortunately, you're the brother who got all the breaks in life. WE are the runty one who can never get the girl. So every time we get a success, yeah we rub it in your faces. Like this thread. I think we're entitled to. We are mass consumers of what you export, so it's nice to be appreciated too. Add to that general British competitiveness, and the fact that most Brits are kinda rude as a way of life, and you get threads like this. It isn't a nationalist thing, it's more of a society kinda thing. We aren't like this because we love Britain, we're like this because, frankly, Britain doesn't have much worth loving any more, and so we take full advantage of our successes. We'll still be drinking Coca Cola tomorrow, and watching awful remakes of good foreign language films, but allow us Dr Who today

EDIT: Ask any Brit in person the second line of the anthem, and look at their confused faces... it's not sung in schools, nor taught. Most schools won't own a British flag at all. What's the point? It's a difficult comparison, being very different countries, but you can't compare English nationalism, as it doesn't exist. The BNP and EDL and that a just fronts for racist parties. They don't give a shit about "nationalism" or patriotism.

Hmm... those are some very interesting points. Up until I took a trip to Europe a few years ago I didn't realize how omnipresent America is in much the rest of the world. I went to see Canterbury cathedral and there was a beautiful entrance arch for it and on either side of it were a McDonalds and a Starbucks. While I was in Germany about to go to sleep I watched nearly the entire movie of Herbie the Love Bug. I guess I had just assumed that everything would be so different over there. And I guess I was surprised and a little disappointed. If you don't watch the news here it is very easy to forget that the rest of the world exists.

Still, it honestly sounds like you're describing nationalism to me. If Dr. Who is something that you're proud of simply because it was made in Britain, by Brits, using British funds then what you're feeling is nationalist pride. Nationalism doesn't need to manifest in relation to overt national symbols like the flag or what have you.

Edit: And contrary to what I said before that's not necessarily a bad thing. I've really enjoyed the Dr. Who that I've seen and I think it's an excellent diplomat representing British culture the world over.

I still wouldn't call it patriotic... it's hard to explain. We don't love it because it's British, we love it for being good. We are chuffed that it's held in high regard in other countries that normally do it better, but we'd still enjoy it were it not British (although I don't think any other country could do it the same way).

As for the Americanisation of Europe... that's capitalism for you. Although, I'd rather have contemporary American produce and arts than the cheap replicas of ancient European arts that seem to adorn every building in Georgia (where I used to live)...

 

[Sutter Cane]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

Very mature response.

Can't beat em, throw strawmen at em I suppose?

And I already said I find it hard to drop things.

Especially to people like you.

It's a trick I learned from you. Turnaround is fair play, Mr. I Know More Than You About UK Politics Because I live There and I'm Keenly Interested. With your all fancy degrees from the London School of Cretinomics.

Ya know what I'm going to ask this one more time? What does ANY of this have to do with doctor who or tv ratings? Nothing? didn't think so. You'e dominating a thread with an off topic argument. If this really had ANYTHING to do with the article I'd be less pissed, but it doesn't. Why don't you two go and start a new topic or resolve this via PMS and leave the thread for people who are actually interested in talking about doctor who and its ratings.

Why don't you ask your boy Abandon the same thing? He's just as guilty as I am. Picking sides and playing favorites?

I'm not picking F**KING SIDES. I haven't even thoroughly ead your damn argument. All I care about is that this is a doctor who thread, and in a doctor who thread i expect people to be talking about DOCTOR WHO. You want to keep arguing fine, create a new thread over in the politics forum and link him there. YOUR ARGUMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE THREAD IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT

 

[Cpt Corallis]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

Very mature response.

Can't beat em, throw strawmen at em I suppose?

And I already said I find it hard to drop things.

Especially to people like you.

It's a trick I learned from you. Turnaround is fair play, Mr. I Know More Than You About UK Politics Because I live There and I'm Keenly Interested. With your all fancy degrees from the London School of Cretinomics.

Ya know what I'm going to ask this one more time? What does ANY of this have to do with doctor who or tv ratings? Nothing? didn't think so. You'e dominating a thread with an off topic argument. If this really had ANYTHING to do with the article I'd be less pissed, but it doesn't. Why don't you two go and start a new topic or resolve this via PMS and leave the thread for people who are actually interested in talking about doctor who and its ratings.

Why don't you ask your boy Abandon the same thing? He's just as guilty as I am. Picking sides and playing favorites?

I'm not picking F**KING SIDES. I haven't even thoroughly ead your damn argument. All I care about is that this is a doctor who thread, and in a doctor who thread i expect people to be talking about DOCTOR WHO. You want to keep arguing fine, create a new thread over in the politics forum and link him there. YOUR ARGUMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE THREAD IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT

Also, just to point out that normally everyone who is quoted gets a notification. Not just the last person in the thread. So his comments do apply to both parties.

 

[aashell13]

In the unlikely event that anyone on this thread is still talking about Dr. Who:

What is the relationship of the various Doctors to one another? are they in some kind of linear timeline, like the Star Trek series are(I.E. all the series's take place at different times in the same universe, and reference each other), or are they supposed to exist separately?

 

[JDKJ]

I'm glad you think yours are any more informed than mine. But, then again, I've never heard the fishmonger confess that his fish wasn't fresh.

I'm a UK resident and I take an active interest in our politics.

You googled BNP and read a wikipedia article.

............ Yea.

Did you plant cookies in my laptop? How do you know from where I obtained my knowledge of the BNP? Because I cited to wiki doesn't mean that's the sole source of my knowledge. For all you know, I could hold a Ph.D. in Comparative Political Science. Again, you are ignorant of that about which you know absolutely nothing. And I'm a resident of the United States and take an active interest in their politics. So what? Does that make me the definitive authority on US politics? No, it doesn't, No more than you being a UK resident interested in UK politics makes you the definitive authority on politics in the UK. That's just argumentum ad verecundiam.

Hello there strawmen, you'd disappeared for a while, nice to see you rearing your heads again.

I never claimed to be a definitive authority. Just that I knew more about it than you.

The fact that Wikipedia was your go to source kind of tells me that you don't have a Ph.D in comparative political science.

Me being a resident of the UK that actively follows my countries politics trumps your last minute Wikipedia acquired knowledge.

I live here, I can tell you that the BNP doesn't have the kind of sway you're suggesting.

You also (wilfully?) misrepresented the figures you got from wiki.

Claiming that the BNP had 14% of the total British votes cast when they actually had 1.9%. 14.6% was what they managed to get in one constituency.

All this is kinda pointing to, the not too unreasonable assumption, that you're not a graduate of political science.

To put it bluntly, I'd be surprised if you were a graduate of anything.

(That is based solely on your attitude throughout this entire fiasco.)

Well I don't know about the two of you but I've thoroughly enjoyed this 'fiasco'. With the witty barbs and all it was a bit like reading a script for 'House'. BDKJ seems to be making the very simple point that racism and xenophobia are just as prevalent in British politics as they are in American politics and has offered certain facts which seem to back up the fact that nationalist parties have gained support among at least a minority of Britons. I don't really see how that can be argued given the evidence presented. Now what I find most interesting is the fact that a previous thread had led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong BDKJ) that BDKJ was a British expat living in the States. Knowing that, Abandon, would you still have argued so vehemently (or argued at all) against the mere assertion that American and British politics have a similar level of racism and xenophobia? Did the flag in his profile make all the difference?

If nothing else this thread has completely disabused me of the notion that Britons are any less nationalistic than American and for that I'm glad I read it. Personally I think there will come a day when we as a global interconnected society decide that nationalism as a concept should be viewed in much the same way as elitism.

That wasn't his point at all. His point was that

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

That's what set me off.

I said on numerous occasions that the US and the UK both had racist idiots intermingling with the rest of us. But saying that simply because there is a party dedicated to it in the UK doesn't reflect us as a nation, for the simple fact that we ascribe to the principle of 'freedom of assembly'. The US does not.

If he'd have simply said the US is not more nationalist as a whole than the UK. I'd have agreed with him.

That is unfortunately not what he said.

I also didn't check his profile. So no, that didn't effect my judgement of him.

Again, you either twist my words or fail to comprehend them. I posed the rhetorical question: "More extremist than the Brits and the BNP?" in response to the poster claiming that the Americans were nationalistic (in all fairness and in the interest of accuracy, the poster glibly began to type "nationalist," struck it, and replaced it with "patriotic'). Which then and now struck me as someone living in a glass house and throwing stones.

And why are you claiming that there's no right to assembly in the United States? The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I actually quoted him to you. You know, the guy who was 'joking'.

He didn't mention anything about politics. Merely that Americans as a whole are very patriotic. Verging on nationalistic.

You know... the use of (often untrue) stereotyping as a joke?

Pretty common.

And the part of your comment I highlighted tells your tell well enough. I twisted nothing. Pure copypasta.

I don't know a thing that you tell me I know. I already told that I didn't see the humor (or "humour" -- spell it nay fucking way you want).

You don't need to get the humour.

It's there.

Also, I edited this bit in to the last post because I forgot it.

Edit. Forgot to reply to this bit.

America has basically got a 2 party system. You don't get (true) fringe parties in America because everyone votes democrat or republican.

Never heard of Ralph Nader and the Green Party? Never heard of Ross Perot? Never heard of Steve Forbes? You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite. I win, you lose.

I never claimed to be an authority. I claimed to know more about it than you.

(not seen any evidence to the contrary)

Good to see the strawmen are back again.

Since you like wiki so much.

There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system;[1] historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won any elections. In countries such as Britain and Spain,[2] two major parties emerge which have strong influence and tend to elect most of the candidates, but a multitude of lesser parties exist with varying degrees of influence, and sometimes these lesser parties are able to elect officials who participate in the legislature

Before you go off on one, that particular article describes the UK as a lesser two part system because of the general domination of labour and conservative.

But the recent hung parliament here due to a third party kind of negates that.

It's not that the US can't have a third party, it's that they're pretty pointless.

Much like the lesser parties in the UK... such as the BNP.

You wanna argue American politics with me? You can't! I live in the US and take a keen interest in US politics. You live in the UK and, at best, have to Google some crap offa wiki. I'm the authority and you don't know the difference between shit and marmite about US politics. I win, you lose.

Besides, I though you were going to ignore me. You're looking like a crack-head with an empty pipe. You just gotta come back for more, huh?

Very mature response.

Can't beat em, throw strawmen at em I suppose?

And I already said I find it hard to drop things.

Especially to people like you.

It's a trick I learned from you. Turnaround is fair play, Mr. I Know More Than You About UK Politics Because I live There and I'm Keenly Interested. With your all fancy degrees from the London School of Cretinomics.

Ya know what I'm going to ask this one more time? What does ANY of this have to do with doctor who or tv ratings? Nothing? didn't think so. You'e dominating a thread with an off topic argument. If this really had ANYTHING to do with the article I'd be less pissed, but it doesn't. Why don't you two go and start a new topic or resolve this via PMS and leave the thread for people who are actually interested in talking about doctor who and its ratings.

Why don't you ask your boy Abandon the same thing? He's just as guilty as I am. Picking sides and playing favorites?

I'm not picking F**KING SIDES. I haven't even thoroughly ead your damn argument. All I care about is that this is a doctor who thread, and in a doctor who thread i expect people to be talking about DOCTOR WHO. You want to keep arguing fine, create a new thread over in the politics forum and link him there. YOUR ARGUMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE THREAD IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT

And neither does Abandon's. And you can see enough to see that I'm not having a conversation with myself. Which does leave me wondering why you picked me to fuck with and ain't fucking with Abandon. What? Of the two available chops, I look I'm the easier one to bust? Go bust Abandon's chops. Something tells me that between him and I, he'll be much more inclined to listen to you than I will.