Anglosphere

Damian E14   Wed May 27, 2009 8:05 am GMT
Blunt and Truthful:

Who knows who you really are but I so admire your plain speaking - a man (I assume you are of that gender but something tells me you are) after my own heart - teeling it as it is in your eyes - good for you for being so blunt and truthful, Blunt and Truthful.

So my writing is sterotypically gay? I'm so flattered. Do you think you'd have something to say about the way I strike the keys of my computer keyboard? The way I hold my pen when I sign a letter I've just printed off? The way I hold my cup of coffee?

I assume you're in California? I'm so glad it's over 6k miles away from here....an entire ocean and an entire Continent away....how cool is that....now buzz off down to the polling place.....Arnie Swarzathingumebobs wants your vote.
Arnold   Wed May 27, 2009 8:32 am GMT
At least California is a relatively progressive State.
Robin Michael   Wed May 27, 2009 9:58 am GMT
I know this is going off at a tangent.




New words for you

Capitalism

"driving on the left hand side"

Sterling

Episcopalian

Soccer

Rugby

Cricket

Democracy

Trial by Jury

Civilisation




Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World (Paperback)

by Niall Ferguson (Author)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Empire-Britain-Made-Modern-World/dp/0141007540


See also: Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels



Karl Marx, 'Das Kapital'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Kapital


Friedrich Engels, 'The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844'

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1844engels.html
Damian London E14   Wed May 27, 2009 10:46 am GMT
***The Sky News political correspondant is a real poofter***

A poofter? How would you know that - is there something you want to share with us in here, RM?

Poor old Peter Spencer - a Sky News reporter for over thirty years - the bloke deserves a medal not meaningless "insults"....personally I never consider the word as such but there again, as a journalist, slings and arrows are mere harmless bagatelles.

Is Peter a "poofter" because he is unfailingly smartly dressed and stylish - even in the most difficult of highly articulate and gesticulates with his hands a great deal in order to emphaisis all his points before the camera - his mother is French, for heaven's sake! He's inherited it from his maman! If hand gesticulation and expressive verbalisation are signs of "poofterism" then France is heaving with them.

Nobody has ever really satisfactorily explained the " real" meaning of "poofter" - apparently it originated in Ozland and it appears to be not so much an insult as such - more a kind of banter not necessarily hostile. Pissed up semi naked backwoodsmen holding up the bars of wooden shacks passing for pubs in the wilds of the Aussie Outback are hurling the word back and forth, to and from each other, all the bloody time.

He has a home on the coast of North Cornwall - lucky blolke. I bet he goes surfing even at his age - Cornish surfing is heaving with "poofters" as well....take a trip down to Perranporth beach one day and see for yourself....see them gesiticulating wildly while riding the Atlantic breakers....

It seems he's been married "more than once"....and has adult offspring...all a wee bit vague....

http://www.skypressoffice.co.uk/SkyNews/AboutUs/biography.asp?id=33
Peace please   Wed May 27, 2009 5:30 pm GMT
"Swiss Tony"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Toni


Swiss Toni is usually depicted wearing a grey suit and with his hair styled in a platinum-blond bouffant quiff.



Fast Show - Swiss Toni

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtoyLPROLZI
Damian E14   Wed May 27, 2009 6:49 pm GMT
Swiss Tony - your typical con merchant - but hey! - he's a car dealer..say no more.....in reality he'd rather make love to a Lamborghini than any big breasted beauty from Bury.
Jasper   Wed May 27, 2009 8:06 pm GMT
"The Sky News political correspondant is a real poofter."

That's funny. While I perceive the commentator as possibly overly effete, I don't perceive him to be necessarily a homosexual.

But then, I don't know English sensibilities as well as you do.
unblunt   Thu May 28, 2009 12:11 am GMT
<< Damian, you are the most annoying person I've ever come across on the internet. I strongly dislike you. Your ramblings are completely uninteresting and you are very self-absorbed. Also, your writing style is excruciatingly stereotypical of a gay and reading your posts caused me enough cringes to impel vote against allowing gay marriage in California.
>>

I, for one, always look forward to posts from Damian, esepcially if they're about UK geography, weather, light pollution, etc., and as long as they're in English.
Uriel   Thu May 28, 2009 12:55 am GMT
Hmmmm....SOMEbody jealous that they can't turn a phrase as well as our Damian!

<<We always consider Mexico as part of North America, but when we say "North America" we may just ignore Mexico. The term often is used as a quick way to refer to the US and Canada together, because often things are the same in those two countries. That doesn't mean that we don't consider Mexico to be a part of North America though.>>

I always consider Mexico part of North America, of course, but it's amusing that Mexicans apparently don't -- they tend to lump both Americans and Canadians together as "norteamericanos". Which is funny, since Canadians do something very similar -- if you see phrases like "North American work ethic" or "North American culture" in print, you can pretty much guess that the author is Canadian. It's like they're too modest (or insecure?) to take credit for themselves and yet too jealous to hand it all to the US, so that's their compromise. And a dead giveaway.

Yes, the English-speaking parts of the Caribbean and Belize count as members of the Anglosphere. So do the Philippines.
nooboid   Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 am GMT
<<"The Sky News political correspondant is a real poofter."

That's funny. While I perceive the commentator as possibly overly effete, I don't perceive him to be necessarily a homosexual.

But then, I don't know English sensibilities as well as you do. >>


It's not required to be literally gay to be considered a poofter. All you have to do is act like a stereotypical gay. If you don't know what that is, turn on the E! channel.
Jasper   Thu May 28, 2009 3:10 am GMT
"It's not required to be literally gay to be considered a poofter. All you have to do is act like a stereotypical gay. If you don't know what that is, turn on the E! channel."

I see.

I thought the word "poofter" was just another word for a homosexual, or gay man, etc.

Thanks for the correction.
Robin Michael   Thu May 28, 2009 3:30 am GMT
Peter Spencer


Special Correspondent

Sky News


A Biography





His flamboyant personality and uniformly pink range of accessories – including a classic pink Mercedes – ensure that he is one of the most instantly recognisable and best-loved figures on the political circuit.


I rest my case.


http://www.skypressoffice.co.uk/SkyNews/AboutUs/biography.asp?id=33
Robin Michael   Thu May 28, 2009 4:25 am GMT
Dear Damian

I have just tried to find out something more about Peter Spencer. I have come across a really good article in the Daily Telegraph by Peter Spencer, however at the end it says -

Peter Spencer is Professor of Economics and Finance, University of York and Economic Adviser, Ernst & Young ITEM Club

Somehow, I do not think they are the same people. The Peter Spencer on Sky News seems very light weight.


http://www.journalisted.com/peter-spencer



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/4782758/The-Queens-tough-question-about-the-credit-crunch-has-not-been-answered.html
Adam   Thu May 28, 2009 7:06 pm GMT
There is only one member of the present Commonwealth that has never had any constitutional link to the British Empire or a Commonwealth member;
********************************

I know that Mozambique, a member of the Commonwealth, used to be a Portuguese colony.

Contrary to popular believe, a country doesn't have to be a former British colony to join the Commonwealth. ANY country can join.

Countries such as Israel and Rwanda (a former French colony) are also applying to join.

Most Commonwealth countries are also republics.
Xavier   Thu May 28, 2009 7:20 pm GMT
Rwanda (a former French colony)

__________________

Rwanda was never a french colony, it was a belgium colony, and before the WW1, a german colony.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rwanda

German colonialism

War and division seemed to open the door for colonialism, and in 1897 German colonialists and missionaries arrived in Rwanda. The Rwandans were divided with a portion of the royal court being very wary and the other seeing the Germans as a welcome alternative to the dominance of Buganda or the Belgians. Backing their faction in the country a pliant government was soon in place. Rwanda put up far less resistance than Burundi to German rule.

In the early years the Germans had little control in the region and were completely dependent on the indigenous government. The Germans didn't encourage modernization and centralization of the regime.

During this period many Europeans had become obsessed with the study of race, and this had an impact on life in Rwanda. Now to the Germans, the Tutsi ruling class was a superior racial type who, because of their apparent "Hamitic" origins on the Horn of Africa, were more "European" than the Hutus they oppressed. Because of their seemingly taller stature, more "honorable and eloquent" personalities, and their willingness to convert to Roman Catholicism, the Tutsis were favored by colonists and powerful Roman Catholic officials, and were put in charge of the farming Hutus (almost in a feudalistic manner), the newly formed principalities, and were given basic ruling positions. Eventually, these positions would turn into the overall governing body of Rwanda. Thus the Tutsi oppression of the Hutus seemed somehow normal and expected. As with later Belgian colonizers, the Germans romanticized Tutsi origins.[citation needed]

Before the colonial period about 15-16% of the population was Tutsi; many of these were poor peasants, but the majority of the ruling elite were Tutsi. A significant minority of the political elite were Hutu, however. Europeans simplified this arrangement and decided that the Hamitic Tutsi were racially superior and should thus make up the entire ruling class, while the inferior Bantu Hutu should become a permanent underclass.

The Germans, simply out of their need for a streamlined administration, helped the Mwami gain greater nominal control over Rwandan affairs. But there were forces that entered with the German colonial authority that had the opposite effect. For instance, Tutsi power weakened through the exposure of Rwanda to capitalist European forces. Money came to be seen by many Hutus as a replacement for cattle, in terms of both economic prosperity and for purposes of creating social standing. Another way in which Tutsi power was weakened by Germany was through the introduction of the head-tax on all Rwandans. As some Tutsis had feared, the introduction of this tax also made the Hutus feel less bonded to the will of their Tutsi patrons and more dependent on the European foreigners, any head-tax necessarily implying equality between any of those heads being counted - whether Hutu or Tutsi. Thus, despite Germany's attempt to uphold traditional Tutsi domination of the Hutus, the Hutus were now getting a slight taste of autonomy from Tutsi rule.

[edit] World War I

While the agreements dividing the region had called for the region to remain neutral in the event of any European war, this was disregarded after the outbreak of World War I. Small forces of Europeans, backed by large numbers of locals fought for control of the region. The main offensive was by the Belgians who quickly forced the German forces out of the region. A British offensive from Uganda came next, British machine gunners preventing the Germans from mounting a successful counter-attack. The German army was now in almost a full panic and retreat. The Belgians then released Congolese raiders who proceeded to loot and pillage the region. A great number of Rwandans, who were fighting alongside the Germans, were killed in the long German retreat.

[edit] Belgian colonialism

At the end of the war the League of Nations mandated Rwanda and its southern neighbor, Burundi, to Belgium as the territory of Ruanda-Urundi. The portion of the German territory, never a part of the Kingdom of Rwanda, was stripped from the colony and attached to Tanganyika, which had been mandated to the British.

The Belgian government continued to rely on the Tutsi power structure for administering the country. It also consistently favored the direct and harsh polices that had been instituted by the Germans. The Belgians insisted that the colony turn a profit, and this meant forcing the population to grow large quantities of coffee. Each peasant was required to devote a certain percentage of their fields to coffee and this was enforced by the Belgians and their local, mainly Tutsi, allies. An onerous corvée was also introduced, labour that was enforced by the whip - eight strokes before work each morning. This forced labour approach to colonization was condemned by many internationally, and was extremely unpopular in Rwanda. Hundreds of thousands of Rwandans immigrated to the British protectorate of Uganda, which was much wealthier and did not have the same draconian policies.

As mentioned above, Hutus and Tutsis lived together as neighbors before the colonial period. However, Belgian rule solidified the racial divide. The Belgians then gave political power to the Tutsis. Due to the eugenics movement in Europe and the United States, the colonial government became concerned with the differences between Hutu and Tutsi. Scientists arrived to measure skull--and thus, they believed, brain--size. Tutsi's skulls were bigger, they were taller, and their skin was lighter. As a result of this, Europeans came to believe that Tutsis had caucasian ancestry, and were thus "superior" to Hutus. Each citizen was issued a racial identification card, which defined one as legally Hutu or Tutsi. The Belgians gave the majority of political control to the Tutsis. Tutsis began to believe the myth of their superior racial status, and exploited their power over the Hutu majority. In the 1920s, Belgian ethnologists analysed (measured skulls, etc) thousands of Rwandans on analogous racial criteria, such as which would be used later by the Nazis. In 1931, an ethnic identity was officially mandated and administrative documents systematically detailed each person's "ethnicity,". Each Rwandan had an ethnic identity card. The Belgians considered the Tutsis to be the superior race and systematically imposed their authority over the Hutus across the colonial administration and the access to education, engendering great frustration among the other Rwandans.

A history of Rwanda that justified the existence of these racial distinctions was written. No historical, archaeological, or above all linguistic traces have been found to date that confirm this official history. In fact, as those who have looked for such evidence have remarked, the observed differences between the Tutsis and the Hutus are about the same as those evident between the different French social classes in the 1950s. The way people nourished themselves explains a large part of the differences: the Tutsis, since they raised cattle, traditionally drank more milk than the Hutu, who were farmers.

Some observers have also noted an induced replica of the Belgian linguistic conflict in the Rwandan problem. It is undeniable that the Walloons, who were the majority in the beginning in Rwanda, and the Flemish continued their ideological fights and also tried to gain supremacy over one another on Rwandan soil. In the 1950s and 60s, the back and forth of Belgian support for the Tutsis over the Hutus was articled at the same time over Tutsis demands for political independence, like everywhere in Africa, and over the development of the presence of Flemish people in Rwanda who would see in the Hutu a people who were repressed just as they had been (recalling the Armenian genocide).