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

[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

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.

Wrong. Just the last person in the thread gets the notification.

 

[Cpt Corallis]

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?

They are happening in sequence and nominally, the Doctor is forbidden from interfering in his own timeline. But, if the writers need it, they can have multiple doctors come together in the same space/time event : See "The Five Doctors" "The Three Doctors"

Its a bit wibbly.

 

[moose_man]

I LOVED it. Best season opener, IMO. But still can't match End of Time.

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?

They are happening in sequence and nominally, the Doctor is forbidden from interfering in his own timeline. But, if the writers need it, they can have multiple doctors come together in the same space/time event : See "The Five Doctors" "The Three Doctors"

Its a bit wibbly.

I'm pretty sure that they usually have some cosmic event pulling them together to get over his rules. That happened in Five Doctors, right?

BTW, who's psyched for the X Doctors for the fiftieth anniversary?


I swear Moffet if you fuck this up, I'm coming to England.

 

[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

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.

I picked you because you were the first person to post after the 2nd time I asked for the off topic discussion to stop. no other reason.

 

[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.

I didn't pick you because you were the first person to post after the 2nd time I asked for the off topic discussion to stop. no other reason.

Spread your love around, then. No need to shower me alone with it. For all we know, Abandon may be feeling left out and unloved.

 

[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

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.

I didn't pick you because you were the first person to post after the 2nd time I asked for the off topic discussion to stop. no other reason.

Spread your love around, then. No need to shower me alone with it. For all we know, Abandon may be feeling left out and unloved.

or you could continue to act like a total asshat for trying t keep the thread about what it supposed to be about. This will be the last time to you. It seems abandon has already stopped posting so i see no reason to tell him off at this point. grow the hell up man.

 

[Yankeedoodles]

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)...

Hmm... well, alright.

I can certainly agree about replicating ancient architecture. Greco-Roman Revival has never been my favorite and it is everywhere in the South. The place where I live has a lot of Art Deco buildings that I really like. They almost look like they're right out of Bioshock. Granted, Art Deco is technically French but I think the US has done a good job of 'owning' it.

 

[MostlyHarmless]

I thought it was a decent premiere. It wasn't completely horrible, nor was it as fantastic as other premieres, but it did have a nice setup. I've always wanted a Doctor Who episode in America, being American. Yes, it said gasoline. Who honestly cares? One word in the entire 50 minutes it aired. No, Doctor Who is not being Americanised.Just because two episodes in America have been announced doesn't mean they'll have the Doctor speaking in an American accent and drinking beer with whatever stereotypes you put in.

Two American episodes. Gasoline. And he wore a cowboyish hat on an American car. The plot is about 1969 American moonlanding. I don't think they could make that incredibly British. If the entire series was set in America and the actors lost their respective accents, I'd understand the worrying and hate. But it doesn't seem to be looking that way.

Also, did anyone catch River Song telling Rory and Amy that the statues on Easter Island were based off the Doctor. Best random line ever.

 

[Dusk17]

I want David Tennant back! I didn't even know the sixth season had started, as I don't watch TV anymore, though I probably wouldn't have watched it anyways. (I would have forgotten)

 

[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.

I didn't pick you because you were the first person to post after the 2nd time I asked for the off topic discussion to stop. no other reason.

Spread your love around, then. No need to shower me alone with it. For all we know, Abandon may be feeling left out and unloved.

or you could continue to act like a total asshat for trying t keep the thread about what it supposed to be about. This will be the last time to you. It seems abandon has already stopped posting so i see no reason to tell him off at this point. grow the hell up man.

For someone who was interested in preserving the thread's original course, you seem strangely inclined to take it down a detour all of your own making. You may be well-advised to go bark up Abandon's tree and not mine.

 

[Sutter Cane]

I thought it was a decent premiere. It wasn't completely horrible, nor was it as fantastic as other premieres, but it did have a nice setup. I've always wanted a Doctor Who episode in America, being American. Yes, it said gasoline. Who honestly cares? One word in the entire 50 minutes it aired. No, Doctor Who is not being Americanised.Just because two episodes in America have been announced doesn't mean they'll have the Doctor speaking in an American accent and drinking beer with whatever stereotypes you put in.

Two American episodes. Gasoline. And he wore a cowboyish hat on an American car. The plot is about 1969 American moonlanding. I don't think they could make that incredibly British. If the entire series was set in America and the actors lost their respective accents, I'd understand the worrying and hate. But it doesn't seem to be looking that way.

Also, did anyone catch River Song telling Rory and Amy that the statues on Easter Island were based off the Doctor. Best random line ever.

Well to be fair this is the first part of a 2 part episode, so it could very well have a killer ending. The one thing that got on my nerves though was how many times they pulled the "turning around to tell someone something only to forget because you're not looking at them" thing. It started to get annoying by the end of the episode. Also i wonder how they're gonna get the doctor out of dying

 

[L9OBL]

Its cause most people probably catch it online now a days. I know I do its much easier to watch it on your own time especially when turkey season opens the day after and you gotta be up a 4

 

[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)...

Hmm... well, alright.

I can certainly agree about replicating ancient architecture. Greco-Roman Revival has never been my favorite and it is everywhere in the South. The place where I live has a lot of Art Deco buildings that I really like. They almost look like they're right out of Bioshock. Granted, Art Deco is technically French but I think the US has done a good job of 'owning' it.

Just look to one of the most magnificent buildings in the world (Empire State) to see how good American architecture can be. People should stop trying to replicate, and start trying to innovate...

I like how the conversation changed from Dr Who, to popular architecture, via politics.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

Seriously? You're complaining that they used the word "gasoline" while they were in America? You people will complain about anything.

Yeah, like the Yanks would come here and call it petrol.

It's a perfectly valid gripe, it's a UK concept, filmed as a UK show, using public UK funds.
Too right we don't want your grubby fingerprints all over it.

...yes, a number of them probably would.

It's incredibly common for people to adopt the local alternant of characteristic word alternations like gasoline~petrol when they travel.

And you're right about the fact that it's a UK concept, filmed as a UK show, using public UK funds. You just seem to forget that the current episodes are being set in the US. They're having the characters behave as realistic travellers to the US.

If you're going to live there, yes, you'd alter your language whether you wanted to or not.

If you're there on a trip and talking between yourselves, hell no. If you did you'd make it obvious, saying gasoline followed by something like "oop, see what I did there? American, aren't I?" Especially a character like Rory. What you wouldn't do is just have it as a natural part of the sentence.

Plus, anyone with a sense of humour enjoys the moments where cultures clash. An Englishman going to a petrol station in America would ask for petrol. The attendant would helpfully go, "huh, oh, you mean gas." The Englishman would respond with something akin to, "Good lord no man. My car doesn't run on gas. I need petrol. It's a liquid, you can set it on fire and it smells. Surely you know the stuff?" That's fun, intentionally being dimwitted is a great British comedic tradition. And you don't give up opportunities like that.

For example, I want to go to America one day. Whilst there if the opportunity presents itself I want to ask a girl, in my best cockney accent, "can I come in your house?"

Spoiler

"house" in a cockney accent sounds remarkably similar to the American "ass"

Actually, hell yes, people often do.

Perhaps the people around you make some special attempt not to fit in when they travel, but many people tend to make an effort to use the local alternant to sound less like an outsider. But more importantly, people pick up the alternant and start using it relatively naturally extremely fast - it's not at all irregular for things like that to happen within a few days of visiting somewhere.

That said, I do agree that Rory is the type who'd be likely to make a joke of it. I feel like we didn't see quite so much of the normal Rory or Amy in the premiere.

As for the humour - there's writing a character as particularly daft and unaware of other cultures and then there's bad writing. What you've written here does not read as intentionally dimwitted at all, it rather suggests to me that either the Englishman is a complete idiot or is trying to explain to the stupid American that calling it gas is somehow "wrong" (in which case the Englishman is a complete idiot and you've alienated your American audience).

 

[Trivun]

For my part, I have an excuse. I had to watch it on iPlayer as, unlike in previous years, we don't have a TV License in the place I'm living (as we only use the TV for my Xbox, and for DVDs). Plus, I was at work, whereas I usually watch Doctor Who on TV instead when not working.

That being said, the fact that the weekend was a Bank Holiday, and the whole sunshine thing, are pretty big factors to consider. I personally loved the episode, I reckon it's one of the best ones Matt Smith has been in (and bear in mind, last season he actually did something I wasn't expecting, and made me love him even more than David Tennant - yes, seriously). I can't see why everyone seems to not like it as much, to be honest.

Also, those complaining that Rory said 'gasoline' instead of 'petrol'? Grow up. I hate 'Americanisms' as much as any Brit, but seriously people, come on. The episode was set in the USA, and it makes perfect sense that over there someone will use American terms even if they're British. I went to Florida a while back, and used US terms when speaking, completely without thinking. I was born and raised in England and have been here all my life. So honestly. It's NOT A BIG DEAL, PEOPLE...

 

[JDKJ]

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)...

Hmm... well, alright.

I can certainly agree about replicating ancient architecture. Greco-Roman Revival has never been my favorite and it is everywhere in the South. The place where I live has a lot of Art Deco buildings that I really like. They almost look like they're right out of Bioshock. Granted, Art Deco is technically French but I think the US has done a good job of 'owning' it.

Just look to one of the most magnificent buildings in the world (Empire State) to see how good American architecture can be. People should stop trying to replicate, and start trying to innovate...

I like how the conversation changed from Dr Who, to popular architecture, via politics.

The Empire State Building (and, in my opinion, the much more impressive Chrysler Building) are both in the Art Deco style -- which isn't American. It's actually French. But, as Yankeedoo points out, the Americans have "owned" the style. And created a capital city in homage to it: South Miami Beach.

 

[kurupt87]

Spoiler

Seriously? You're complaining that they used the word "gasoline" while they were in America? You people will complain about anything.

Yeah, like the Yanks would come here and call it petrol.

It's a perfectly valid gripe, it's a UK concept, filmed as a UK show, using public UK funds.
Too right we don't want your grubby fingerprints all over it.

...yes, a number of them probably would.

It's incredibly common for people to adopt the local alternant of characteristic word alternations like gasoline~petrol when they travel.

And you're right about the fact that it's a UK concept, filmed as a UK show, using public UK funds. You just seem to forget that the current episodes are being set in the US. They're having the characters behave as realistic travellers to the US.

If you're going to live there, yes, you'd alter your language whether you wanted to or not.

If you're there on a trip and talking between yourselves, hell no. If you did you'd make it obvious, saying gasoline followed by something like "oop, see what I did there? American, aren't I?" Especially a character like Rory. What you wouldn't do is just have it as a natural part of the sentence.

Plus, anyone with a sense of humour enjoys the moments where cultures clash. An Englishman going to a petrol station in America would ask for petrol. The attendant would helpfully go, "huh, oh, you mean gas." The Englishman would respond with something akin to, "Good lord no man. My car doesn't run on gas. I need petrol. It's a liquid, you can set it on fire and it smells. Surely you know the stuff?" That's fun, intentionally being dimwitted is a great British comedic tradition. And you don't give up opportunities like that.

For example, I want to go to America one day. Whilst there if the opportunity presents itself I want to ask a girl, in my best cockney accent, "can I come in your house?"

Spoiler

"house" in a cockney accent sounds remarkably similar to the American "ass"

Actually, hell yes, people often do.

Perhaps the people around you make some special attempt not to fit in when they travel, but many people tend to make an effort to use the local alternant to sound less like an outsider. But more importantly, people pick up the alternant and start using it relatively naturally extremely fast - it's not at all irregular for things like that to happen within a few days of visiting somewhere.

As for the humour - there's writing a character as particularly daft and unaware of other cultures and then there's bad writing. What you've written here does not read as intentionally dimwitted at all, it rather suggests to me that either the Englishman is a complete idiot or is trying to explain to the stupid American that calling it gas is somehow
"wrong" (in which case the Englishman is a complete idiot and you've alienated your American audience).

Oh yeah I know, people do. It's just not a playful Englishman's way of doing things though, and that is precisely what the Doctor Who characters are.

As for your questioning the humour, it's a bit of both. You can be daft but you have to have a reason, otherwise you are just being an idiot.

Calling a liquid Gas is funny. Even on its own. I know it's short for Gasoline but gas is already a word. The definition of which rules out the possibility that Gasoline as a loadable car fuel be a gas. I have no problem with Americans calling it Gas but you can't deny there's a level of cognitive dissonance going on when you refer to a liquid as Gas. To have it picked up on by someone pretending to be slow just makes it funnier.

Yes; he's taking the piss but he's also purporting himself as an idiot, so you can take the piss out of him too. Everyone has fun.

 

[William Ossiss]

The show's gone to hell? Huh? Sure, the first of this two parter wasn't all that impressive, but last season was pretty good. Where's all this pessimism come from?

I love the last season, don't get me wrong.
It's just gone all... well, let's just say it's catering to a different audience now.
An AMERICAN audience - which is completely different to a BRITISH audience.
For example, compare these two television shows - 'The Office (UK)' and 'The Office (US)'.

both sucked hard. meaning the office. look at "the it guys". they TRIED to do an american version, but it never caught on. besides, i liked that about doctor who. it was based in britian and was british. now that doctor who is in AMERICA... and i quote... "the greatest country in the world" or strongest... or whatever. honestly, it's not. it's the biggest BLOWHARD... i am ashamed to call myself a fanboy at this point...

 

[Yankeedoodles]

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)...

Hmm... well, alright.

I can certainly agree about replicating ancient architecture. Greco-Roman Revival has never been my favorite and it is everywhere in the South. The place where I live has a lot of Art Deco buildings that I really like. They almost look like they're right out of Bioshock. Granted, Art Deco is technically French but I think the US has done a good job of 'owning' it.

Just look to one of the most magnificent buildings in the world (Empire State) to see how good American architecture can be. People should stop trying to replicate, and start trying to innovate...

I like how the conversation changed from Dr Who, to popular architecture, via politics.

The Empire State Building (and, in my opinion, the much more impressive Chrysler Building) are both in the Art Deco style -- which isn't American. It's actually French. But, as Yankeedoo points out, the Americans have "owned" the style. And created a capital city in homage to it: South Miami Beach.

Yes. I really do have to get down to Miami at some point (and not just for the architecture). Although I've heard that there are cities in New Zealand rocking the Art Deco which rival Miami.

 

[JDKJ]

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)...

Hmm... well, alright.

I can certainly agree about replicating ancient architecture. Greco-Roman Revival has never been my favorite and it is everywhere in the South. The place where I live has a lot of Art Deco buildings that I really like. They almost look like they're right out of Bioshock. Granted, Art Deco is technically French but I think the US has done a good job of 'owning' it.

Just look to one of the most magnificent buildings in the world (Empire State) to see how good American architecture can be. People should stop trying to replicate, and start trying to innovate...

I like how the conversation changed from Dr Who, to popular architecture, via politics.

The Empire State Building (and, in my opinion, the much more impressive Chrysler Building) are both in the Art Deco style -- which isn't American. It's actually French. But, as Yankeedoo points out, the Americans have "owned" the style. And created a capital city in homage to it: South Miami Beach.

Yes. I really do have to get down to Miami at some point (and not just for the architecture). Although I've heard that there are cities in New Zealand rocking the Art Deco which rival Miami.

It's a "weird" kinda Art Deco on SoBe. Nothing at all like NYC's. All the buildings are painted in pastels. Which is kinda cool and "beachy." And you can definitely see the Art Deco influence. It's just not what you'd think of as Art Deco if you grew up on NYC's Art Deco.