Why do u use word ‘colonize’, instead of ‘conquer’? Then Germany tried to ‘colonize’ world 1941. Does ‘colonize’ mean u came with empty hand and offer to rule their country?
the question is interesting. I suppose to conquer means to erase the former nation completely, assimilate the population, expell the government and call the land Brittain.
As a Brit, I’ve only really come to realise in the last few years, how much the elite of my country have exploited people all over the world (and within the UK) to make their fortunes. I believe that the Brexit vote was a protest against that status quo and the current austerity economics of the UK, but totally misdirected towards the EU as the culprit. The people voting Out believed that the money saved would go to our public services, which it won’t (as it will just get swallowed up into the pit of rising debt) and that it would free them from the darker machinations of big business. It will disappoint them on this count too, as too many of our politicians have their wealth tied to big business and when nasty EU ‘red tape’ (in other words the legislation that protects us) is removed, the corporations will have a field day. Despite their hopes, they also can’t roll back the clock to a rose-tinted previous age. Globalism is here and the negative effects of it will continue whether we are in the EU or not. We feed that monster every day with our consumer power when we buy based on the price of a product and not on how and where it was made.
No doubt some things must have. A bit like the Romans bought underfloor heating with them when they invaded. But Britain’s interference overseas also caused a lot of war and enslavement. We seemed to be good at drawing disastrous new borders for example. The patriotic types in our country still glorify our empire days. They are also the loudest supporters of Brexit.
Here in Britain we have a very influential newspaper press, largely bias towards the right wing. Our newspapers are mostly owned by tax avoiders. For example, the Telegraph media group is owned by the Barclay brothers who are tax exiles, as far as I know Murdoch is too. The Daily Mail which trumpets British patriotism is based in Bermuda to avoid UK tax (surely that is the least patriotic thing you could do?). Even the left wing Guardian is largely owned by financiers, and the City is known as an industry who likes to use tax loopholes.
As a result we have a media which is constantly demonising immigrants. Never mind that they prop up our health service. The papers only shout about them taking our jobs, over burdening our public services and threatening to flood out our culture with theirs. None of it is true, but they are masters of selling these fears. They also regularly print negative stories about people on benefit. They portray immigrants and the unemployed as huge scroungers s sponging off the rest of us. This tactic works. I read a lot of anger with people believing this perception on Facebook. But the few people that game our benefits system are a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the tax being avoided by Britain’s wealthiest and big business. Last year a noble managed to avoid paying inheritance tax that would have covered the entire shortfall in our NHS for the year. But hardly a whisper was made about it.
The media have people looking the wrong way. They look down, rather than up and shake their fists at the wrong people. This peddling of hate is leading to some really nasty attitudes of late. I hope it doesn’t continue.
In Sweden it is the opposite. Despite that the owners of media are right wings the journalists are not seldom socialists. They have tried for years to darken the problems with migration from countries in north aftica and middle east, until now, this year when I have noticed a difference towards more serious journalism.
Journalism should be unbiased reporting. They DO NOT have a responsibility to push the readers into a way of thinking. They should present facts completely unbiased. Neither right och left.
In Sweden people actually do look up. Most people here that are critical to some migration blame the government, not the immigrants.
I have started to think (very controversial) that a new wave of colonization might be a good idea. If you do like the britts did but remove all the hard repression then we might actually in some 30 – 40 years have democracy down there, religous repression might end and women might finally break free. It will not be easy though. Just ask America about Iraq and Afghanistan.
To curse in the church (as we say in Sweden) I say our western way of thinking is actually better than the dito in these countries from where people decide to leave.
That’s true
Det kan inte ha haft någonting alls med EU att göra då, att de ville lämna EU? En stilla undran bara….
Why do u use word ‘colonize’, instead of ‘conquer’? Then Germany tried to ‘colonize’ world 1941. Does ‘colonize’ mean u came with empty hand and offer to rule their country?
I believe colonize mean to make colonies of other nations.
With more or less casualty 🙂
the question is interesting. I suppose to conquer means to erase the former nation completely, assimilate the population, expell the government and call the land Brittain.
We can talk about that a lot 🙂 But ty for conversation
As a Brit, I’ve only really come to realise in the last few years, how much the elite of my country have exploited people all over the world (and within the UK) to make their fortunes. I believe that the Brexit vote was a protest against that status quo and the current austerity economics of the UK, but totally misdirected towards the EU as the culprit. The people voting Out believed that the money saved would go to our public services, which it won’t (as it will just get swallowed up into the pit of rising debt) and that it would free them from the darker machinations of big business. It will disappoint them on this count too, as too many of our politicians have their wealth tied to big business and when nasty EU ‘red tape’ (in other words the legislation that protects us) is removed, the corporations will have a field day. Despite their hopes, they also can’t roll back the clock to a rose-tinted previous age. Globalism is here and the negative effects of it will continue whether we are in the EU or not. We feed that monster every day with our consumer power when we buy based on the price of a product and not on how and where it was made.
Didnt anything good came from brittish colonies?
No doubt some things must have. A bit like the Romans bought underfloor heating with them when they invaded. But Britain’s interference overseas also caused a lot of war and enslavement. We seemed to be good at drawing disastrous new borders for example. The patriotic types in our country still glorify our empire days. They are also the loudest supporters of Brexit.
Here in Britain we have a very influential newspaper press, largely bias towards the right wing. Our newspapers are mostly owned by tax avoiders. For example, the Telegraph media group is owned by the Barclay brothers who are tax exiles, as far as I know Murdoch is too. The Daily Mail which trumpets British patriotism is based in Bermuda to avoid UK tax (surely that is the least patriotic thing you could do?). Even the left wing Guardian is largely owned by financiers, and the City is known as an industry who likes to use tax loopholes.
As a result we have a media which is constantly demonising immigrants. Never mind that they prop up our health service. The papers only shout about them taking our jobs, over burdening our public services and threatening to flood out our culture with theirs. None of it is true, but they are masters of selling these fears. They also regularly print negative stories about people on benefit. They portray immigrants and the unemployed as huge scroungers s sponging off the rest of us. This tactic works. I read a lot of anger with people believing this perception on Facebook. But the few people that game our benefits system are a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the tax being avoided by Britain’s wealthiest and big business. Last year a noble managed to avoid paying inheritance tax that would have covered the entire shortfall in our NHS for the year. But hardly a whisper was made about it.
The media have people looking the wrong way. They look down, rather than up and shake their fists at the wrong people. This peddling of hate is leading to some really nasty attitudes of late. I hope it doesn’t continue.
Is any of this going on in Norway too?
That sounds so familiar 🙁
That’s depressing to hear. 🙁
In Sweden it is the opposite. Despite that the owners of media are right wings the journalists are not seldom socialists. They have tried for years to darken the problems with migration from countries in north aftica and middle east, until now, this year when I have noticed a difference towards more serious journalism.
Journalism should be unbiased reporting. They DO NOT have a responsibility to push the readers into a way of thinking. They should present facts completely unbiased. Neither right och left.
In Sweden people actually do look up. Most people here that are critical to some migration blame the government, not the immigrants.
I have started to think (very controversial) that a new wave of colonization might be a good idea. If you do like the britts did but remove all the hard repression then we might actually in some 30 – 40 years have democracy down there, religous repression might end and women might finally break free. It will not be easy though. Just ask America about Iraq and Afghanistan.
To curse in the church (as we say in Sweden) I say our western way of thinking is actually better than the dito in these countries from where people decide to leave.
Thank you for your insight Robert. That’s very interesting.