Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Social Division In England? An alternative view.
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Andy Wainwright
Jun 16, 2013, 12:07:11 AM6/16/13
to
Whilst it can't be denied that some tensions have been created by the
migration in the last century, it has been considerably overplayed by
the less intelligent sections of the media.
The big two are class and politics. On the latter, it isn't so much of a
question of tastes for one party or another, but metaphysical model or
world view a person posses. In many ways this is a hangover from more
religious times, with different preachers putting their own spin on the
Bible, much in the same way the modern media puts spin on news events.
As for class, it's often oversimplified by sociologists, in much the
same way other aspects of identity such as race, sex and sexuality
commonly are. For instance, there's the issue of those aspiring to a
"higher" social circle, and likewise those of higher classes who can
sometimes be unconcerned with pecking orders and would rather use
privilage to be simply different.
In England most social segregation is along these two lines. Genetics
aren't heavily involved, as siblings can often be on opposite sides of
any divide.
Most of those talking about a unified, homgeneous past have scant
understanding of this country, which is and always has been largely
comprised of various tribes and cliques.
Whilst such division has always existed and likely always will, some
factors can make things worse. A great one is the decline of the pub.
The great thing about this institution was it traditionally brought a
wide variety of people together. It's been under attack in a number of
ways- for instance the smoking ban and high duty rates could be
attributed to the government, but at the same time there has been some
quite shocking inkeeping. The fact that the industry was unable to
campaign succesfully against the threats from the state must partly be
blamed on selfishness and small-mindedness of those in the business.
Two words to me spell the death of a good pub- "up market". Firstly,
spend a lot on fancy decors and themes, pushing up the prices- at the
end of the day it's the people and the drink not the decoration that
makes a good pub a good pub. They've then gone on to pointless dress
codes and the like, and kicked out the builders, bikers, students,
hippies, druggies and drunks. From my experience non of this lot
generally cause much bother- turn the place into a meat market by
contrast and it's barneys abound. Much nicer to have bank manager,
solicitor and village idiot quitely discussing philosophy- really that
sort of thing was quite common- variety made the atmosphere.
Another division-promoter has been the decline of the BBC. For all it's
faults, it managed for most of it's life to portray a diverse yet
inclusive Britain. Some commercial broadcasters though used cross media
influence and political power stemming from it to effectively strip the
Beeb of what made it unique. I mean, what's the point of spending money
buying in a formula that copys say X Factor or Britain's Got Talent- why
not spend the cash doing something original and interesting themselves,
creating jobs in the process. The BBC doesn't run adverts, so why is it
concerned with the demographics that commercials have to deal with to
sell air time to businesses? If a BBC series isn't an immediate hit,
unlike ITV or Sky it doesn't cost them any revenue, and they can afford
to be patient with a good product till the public discover it's merits.
Sadly, many of the broadcasters classics would not have been made now,
because it lacks the far sighted vision to have any confidence. As for
ratings, if a program is informative and entertaining to those who have
the minds to appreciate it, which turns out to be not many, it's still
adding more to the cannon of British culture that a crap copy of a
commercial hit show.
Both these issues are linked- overcommercialise and start talking about
target demographics and so forth, and you kill off the melting pot,
essentially dividing the country along the lines chosen by advertisers.
Distill, purify and so forth to hone marketing desires, and you damage
the crossover- this crossover like the lawyer and the biker in a pub
putting the world to rights is what binds the disparate tribes of the
country together.
migration in the last century, it has been considerably overplayed by
the less intelligent sections of the media.
The big two are class and politics. On the latter, it isn't so much of a
question of tastes for one party or another, but metaphysical model or
world view a person posses. In many ways this is a hangover from more
religious times, with different preachers putting their own spin on the
Bible, much in the same way the modern media puts spin on news events.
As for class, it's often oversimplified by sociologists, in much the
same way other aspects of identity such as race, sex and sexuality
commonly are. For instance, there's the issue of those aspiring to a
"higher" social circle, and likewise those of higher classes who can
sometimes be unconcerned with pecking orders and would rather use
privilage to be simply different.
In England most social segregation is along these two lines. Genetics
aren't heavily involved, as siblings can often be on opposite sides of
any divide.
Most of those talking about a unified, homgeneous past have scant
understanding of this country, which is and always has been largely
comprised of various tribes and cliques.
Whilst such division has always existed and likely always will, some
factors can make things worse. A great one is the decline of the pub.
The great thing about this institution was it traditionally brought a
wide variety of people together. It's been under attack in a number of
ways- for instance the smoking ban and high duty rates could be
attributed to the government, but at the same time there has been some
quite shocking inkeeping. The fact that the industry was unable to
campaign succesfully against the threats from the state must partly be
blamed on selfishness and small-mindedness of those in the business.
Two words to me spell the death of a good pub- "up market". Firstly,
spend a lot on fancy decors and themes, pushing up the prices- at the
end of the day it's the people and the drink not the decoration that
makes a good pub a good pub. They've then gone on to pointless dress
codes and the like, and kicked out the builders, bikers, students,
hippies, druggies and drunks. From my experience non of this lot
generally cause much bother- turn the place into a meat market by
contrast and it's barneys abound. Much nicer to have bank manager,
solicitor and village idiot quitely discussing philosophy- really that
sort of thing was quite common- variety made the atmosphere.
Another division-promoter has been the decline of the BBC. For all it's
faults, it managed for most of it's life to portray a diverse yet
inclusive Britain. Some commercial broadcasters though used cross media
influence and political power stemming from it to effectively strip the
Beeb of what made it unique. I mean, what's the point of spending money
buying in a formula that copys say X Factor or Britain's Got Talent- why
not spend the cash doing something original and interesting themselves,
creating jobs in the process. The BBC doesn't run adverts, so why is it
concerned with the demographics that commercials have to deal with to
sell air time to businesses? If a BBC series isn't an immediate hit,
unlike ITV or Sky it doesn't cost them any revenue, and they can afford
to be patient with a good product till the public discover it's merits.
Sadly, many of the broadcasters classics would not have been made now,
because it lacks the far sighted vision to have any confidence. As for
ratings, if a program is informative and entertaining to those who have
the minds to appreciate it, which turns out to be not many, it's still
adding more to the cannon of British culture that a crap copy of a
commercial hit show.
Both these issues are linked- overcommercialise and start talking about
target demographics and so forth, and you kill off the melting pot,
essentially dividing the country along the lines chosen by advertisers.
Distill, purify and so forth to hone marketing desires, and you damage
the crossover- this crossover like the lawyer and the biker in a pub
putting the world to rights is what binds the disparate tribes of the
country together.
walt tonne
Jun 16, 2013, 11:58:49 AM6/16/13
to
Wimpy bullshit. The invasion of UK is now a racial one.
Total race war will envelope the Isles. White brits
must fight or die.
Total race war will envelope the Isles. White brits
must fight or die.
Richard Tobin
Jun 16, 2013, 12:03:44 PM6/16/13
to
In article <511499dd-cc8d-4311...@n5g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
were born then.
-- Richard
walt tonne <tonnew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Total race war will envelope the Isles. White brits
>must fight or die.
Yawn. You were probably saying the same back in the 1970s, assuming you
>Total race war will envelope the Isles. White brits
>must fight or die.
were born then.
-- Richard
Vidcapper
Jun 16, 2013, 1:25:38 PM6/16/13
to
--
Regards,
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
R. Mark Clayton
Jun 17, 2013, 9:55:14 AM6/17/13
to
You mean "chavs" and "chav nots"?
"Andy Wainwright" <andrewricha...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kpjdcg$kf6$1...@dont-email.me...
"Andy Wainwright" <andrewricha...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kpjdcg$kf6$1...@dont-email.me...
> Whilst it can't be denied that some tensions have been created by the
> migration in the last century, it has been considerably overplayed by the
> less intelligent sections of the media.
>
SNIP very long description
> migration in the last century, it has been considerably overplayed by the
> less intelligent sections of the media.
>
Andy Wainwright
Jun 19, 2013, 6:52:50 AM6/19/13
to
And you call people faggots?
Personally, I'm not worried about what colour little boys bottoms are-
I'm not into little boys bottoms.
0 new messages