May Al...Alan...Allah be with those who believe!
why are you using "Anglo-Saxon" all the time?
>>I'm still not convinced that Britain and America are similar with regards to religion either. According to recent opinion polls (which I can find later if anyone needs verification), about 96% of Americans claim to believe in God, compared to about 44% of British people. And then, about 64% of Americans claimed that they had no doubts about their belief in God, compared to about 22% of British people. Equally, the figure which one sees in the media of people who attend church regularly in Britain is only 7%, whilst the figures for the US are significantly higher. The percentages here for Britain are more or less in line with those in most other North-Western European countries.<<
The religious similarities between the US and the UK are less in the particular present situations, which are not particularly similar at all, but rather are primarily historical in nature, in particular with religious *attitudes* that developed in what is now the UK being brought over to colonial America, from which religious toleration and the widely differentiated religious groups which came to characterize the US developed.
That said, it must be emphasized that that the US and UK have gone separate paths since the independence of the US from the UK, as the Anglican Church remained a strong influence in the UK while it is not significant today in the US, where instead a wide range of religious groups is present, while at the same time, as you mentioned, the US is far more religious than the UK today. In this way, the UK is more similar to the general pattern in much of continental Europe today and less similar to the US.
The religious similarities between the US and the UK are less in the particular present situations, which are not particularly similar at all, but rather are primarily historical in nature, in particular with religious *attitudes* that developed in what is now the UK being brought over to colonial America, from which religious toleration and the widely differentiated religious groups which came to characterize the US developed.
That said, it must be emphasized that that the US and UK have gone separate paths since the independence of the US from the UK, as the Anglican Church remained a strong influence in the UK while it is not significant today in the US, where instead a wide range of religious groups is present, while at the same time, as you mentioned, the US is far more religious than the UK today. In this way, the UK is more similar to the general pattern in much of continental Europe today and less similar to the US.
"How many decades of general elections did we have where the only viable choice was between Labour and the Tories?"
Interesting. Surely in a democracy, all parties are equally viable if people choose to vote for them? No?
On a more serious note, I personally as a Brit of slightly mixed origins would never class myself in any sense as Anglo-Saxon, resembling as I do the celtic stock from which I am predominantly descended.
Oh and golf was invented in Scotland (as was curling), so I'm not sure how anglo-saxon that is, either.
Interesting. Surely in a democracy, all parties are equally viable if people choose to vote for them? No?
On a more serious note, I personally as a Brit of slightly mixed origins would never class myself in any sense as Anglo-Saxon, resembling as I do the celtic stock from which I am predominantly descended.
Oh and golf was invented in Scotland (as was curling), so I'm not sure how anglo-saxon that is, either.
<<Interesting. Surely in a democracy, all parties are equally viable if people choose to vote for them? No? >>
I meant 'viable' in the sense of 'getting enough seats in parliament to be able to form the government', obviously. The Monster Raving Loony Party may have been a viable choice for *some* people - they always got some votes - but do you think they were ever viable candidates for government? For decades, the only 2 parties likely to get into power were Labour and the Tories.
Anyway, this is hopelessly off-topic, not to mention dull!
<<Only the English could devise a game that takes four days to come to any sort of result and how they work it out God only knows.>>
So why is it so hugely popular in other countries?
I meant 'viable' in the sense of 'getting enough seats in parliament to be able to form the government', obviously. The Monster Raving Loony Party may have been a viable choice for *some* people - they always got some votes - but do you think they were ever viable candidates for government? For decades, the only 2 parties likely to get into power were Labour and the Tories.
Anyway, this is hopelessly off-topic, not to mention dull!
<<Only the English could devise a game that takes four days to come to any sort of result and how they work it out God only knows.>>
So why is it so hugely popular in other countries?
"So why is it so hugely popular in other countries?"
Fair enough. It is popular in a HANDFUL of other countries but it still plays second fiddle to soccer or rugby.
Fair enough. It is popular in a HANDFUL of other countries but it still plays second fiddle to soccer or rugby.
Every sport in the world plays second fiddle to football/soccer. There's no other sport that comes anywhere close in terms of popularity, all over the world. Comparisons are pointless.
I seriously doubt that cricket plays second fiddle to rugby. There may be more rugby-playing nations - I'm not sure - but cricket is HUGE in India, so in terms of numbers of fans, I bet cricket is ahead.
I seriously doubt that cricket plays second fiddle to rugby. There may be more rugby-playing nations - I'm not sure - but cricket is HUGE in India, so in terms of numbers of fans, I bet cricket is ahead.
"All of the British people I've met seem to like to being called Anglo-Saxons but it's true the Anglo-Saxons were a minority in Britain from the very beginning. The largest numbers of Germanic invaders were the Danes and the Norman French. "
After the the Norman invasion, I believe the English (Anglo Saxons or whatever you like to call them) were the majority population in England at the time and the Normans only represented about 10% of the population at most. This is probably why the Normans eventually adopted English, as they adopted the language of the majority.
After the the Norman invasion, I believe the English (Anglo Saxons or whatever you like to call them) were the majority population in England at the time and the Normans only represented about 10% of the population at most. This is probably why the Normans eventually adopted English, as they adopted the language of the majority.
***Oh and golf was invented in Scotland (as was curling), so I'm not sure how anglo-saxon that is, either****
Not very is the answer to that one.....not at all in fact.
Golf: Carnoustie, just across the water there on the Fife coast, saw the world's first golf course.
Curling: a fullblooded game of Caledonian vitality and on going movement and excitement, unlike soporifically Anglo Saxon cricket. As for popularity elsewhere in the world outside of England...obviously English influence...nothing whatsoever to do with the more firebrand Scots....or Welsh.
Possibly some sort of Anglo Saxon mass hypnosis is to blame out there in the far flung colonies. The Americans probably left the club too early to fall under the cricket spell and were already setting their sights on the far more energetic baseball anyway ;-)
Not very is the answer to that one.....not at all in fact.
Golf: Carnoustie, just across the water there on the Fife coast, saw the world's first golf course.
Curling: a fullblooded game of Caledonian vitality and on going movement and excitement, unlike soporifically Anglo Saxon cricket. As for popularity elsewhere in the world outside of England...obviously English influence...nothing whatsoever to do with the more firebrand Scots....or Welsh.
Possibly some sort of Anglo Saxon mass hypnosis is to blame out there in the far flung colonies. The Americans probably left the club too early to fall under the cricket spell and were already setting their sights on the far more energetic baseball anyway ;-)
Benjamin, we have more than two parties in the US. There were no less than 5 on my last election ballot, just for the presidential slot alone. Granted, the Greens and the Libertarians don't get to make much noise, but they do exist, and every now and then an independent shows up in the government, too.
Parties have also come and gone over the years, and many have had some success. Nowhere is a strict "two-party" system codified into law, either.
Parties have also come and gone over the years, and many have had some success. Nowhere is a strict "two-party" system codified into law, either.
"Oh and golf was invented in Scotland (as was curling),"
You Scots have a lot to answer for.
You Scots have a lot to answer for.
Guest : « This is probably why the Normans eventually adopted English, as they adopted the language of the majority. »
C'est vrai. Mais les francophones ont remodelé l'anglais à leur image.
C'est vrai. Mais les francophones ont remodelé l'anglais à leur image.
Yeah, I'd imagine that the Scots are more Anglo-Saxon than the majority of English people.
Well, if you ignore our Scots dialect and our very strong local accents we do speak better English than do our friends South of the Border. I'm currently well south of the Border and ....trust me....I know what I'm talking about! Ha! :-)
Anglo Saxon ,,,,,Check your history guys ...The English are not Anglo Saxons....They are English ... A mixture of many different people.
Britons, Romans, Celts, Normans, Vikings, Spanish, Moors or pheonicians, perhaps even greeks, Germans (Anglo Saxons), and on and on .......ENGLISH
Britons, Romans, Celts, Normans, Vikings, Spanish, Moors or pheonicians, perhaps even greeks, Germans (Anglo Saxons), and on and on .......ENGLISH
Hello, I'm French and what you say about the French use of "anglo-saxon" is right, we French commonly call British people that way, but in our mouths it has no particular connotation, it just means "british" (in the common meaning). Anyway, that's the way I use it in French and there's no wonder some people also use it in English because they know the French Word and think it has the same current meaning in English.