Well done Belgium. Veil banned

[Nuttybear]

I fully support this. Really wish the liberals would put aside there protection of these men and free the women here. I vote for bring the same law here. I despise the veil and all it stands for. I saw a woman trip and fall because she could not see the kerb!!! Her husband/uncle/dad then had to guide her over the next kerb. I saw them again in the supermarket I so wanted to throw eggs at him but it would only make her plight worse. I know a minority want to wear the veil. Well, there are countries that support that decision. I know it might make matter worse for some but there must be a stand to free these women of this 13th century habit. Wearing of the veil is not in the Koran. All for modest dress, if you so wish but, unable to look around your world freely is wrong.

I think because you could so readily identify your dh's 'ness' (Italian or Spanish I presume?), but not Britishness.

For me, Britishness is a sense of tolerance, fair play, love of one's country (patriotism if you like), having a fantastic history and heritage; being reliable; getting the job done (keep buggering on), standing up to be counted, courtesy, taking the long view (because the Brits have seen it all before during our long and varied past), a wicked sense of humour, masters of irony and understatement, willing to volunteer.

The ban may have been passed in Belgium, but it is thought unlikely it will get into law before the elections in June, and it will face challenges in the meantime.

The Netherlands are I think being slowly stretched to the limits of their tolerance with radical Islam. The murder of Theo van Gogh was a case in point, and the mural that was erected in an EU building showing the Netherlands as a country drowning in a sea of mosques was quite apposite.

Yes scary, that is what I meant. And your approval of the covered face in contrast, give it.

Scary I forgot the sense of humour, the sense of the ridiculous and the power of understatement.

"The pier's burning down!"

"'Bout time."

Then there's the large English blonde, unstoppable and domineering, but kind to the nth degree and utterly convinced of human goodness.

OK - so that what's I was asking.

I think Britishness is:
humour and not taking ourselves too seriously
fair play
rooting for the underdog
getting bogged down in the detail
getting on with stuff
moaning
freedom of expression - being who you want to be (something I very much appreciate).

but also our society criminalised and violent.

Not seen much patriotism in my lifetime and I feel we don't appreciate what we have.

But is has been said many many times that we appear to have no culture - there are countries - particularly those with the history of the British Empire that assumed the UK would be a country full of polite people, eating sandwiches and above all, overtly Christian. They were quite shocked when they came over to find it not so. And for many culture is stongly entwined with religion.

I'm proud to be British in a quiet sort of way. Don't think I'm not.

That you even need to describe 'Britishness' is strange, imho.

Normally, a nation has a common history, language, values, culture, and even a set of common enemies - an "us" versus "them", if you like.

UK appears from the outside to be a very fragmented country. Perhaps part of that is because of your colonial past (Indians etc coming to live in the UK) and part of that is the easy immigration policy. The end result is that you are now struggling to define the uniting characteristics of your nation. Nobody else would answer "Who are we?" with "moaning", "sense of humour", stiff upper lip, and the like.

Another very fragmented country is of course the US, but then again, immigration is their raison d'etre and also with such a short history, even the first settler families have little common history anyway. "American dream" unites the Americans, and that is "Anyone can be rich". They don't particularly bother with such existential questions as "What is 'American'?".

Well, Shakespeare, Keats, Shelley, Dickens for literature; Walton, Britten, Tallis, Handel for music; Ayckborne, Pinter for plays; that's just for starters culture wise.

Some of our society is criminalised and violent, but not all - I didn't see much violent crime in rural Cornwall for instance.

I think that it is a shame that the UK is beginning to lose it's Christian heritage because that has informed and shaped the UK. I live in Belgium and the fact that it is a Christian country is apparent in the shrines in the towns and villages; the no shops open on Sunday; time off for Ascension day etc. I do wonder how much of the way UK society has changed is due to influences from the US. Belgium (despite a large American population for NATO and other firms), has kept out the US influence. There are McDs and Pizza Hut for example, but I have yet to see a KFC or a Burger King. There is Starbucks at the airport, but not elsewhere; and no other really major coffee chains such as Caffe Nero or Costa that I have seen.

'Nobody else would answer "Who are we?" with "moaning", "sense of humour", stiff upper lip, and the like'...that's how we know we are Brits! We do believe in fair play and not taking ourselves too seriously as Giveit said.

Ds is at an International school, where the parents are quite heavily involved. It is fascinating that if a job needs doing, it is invariably the Brit parents that take it on. We agonise sometimes about other nationalities feeling left out, but they don't want to take on what the Brits do. We do it because it needs doing, and if we didn't, various initiatives (for the benefit of the kids and the school) would grind to an almighty halt.

Yes, sure, but lots of other people believe in fair play and have a dry sense of humour.

Well, I wonder as I'm from a mixed background.

What I said was what I know of it but my upbringing wasn't typically English in the '70s.

Cultural history here is rich no doubt, but how does the average kid growing up now see what British is? My ds is a UK national but already views himself as his dad's nationality and he's not even 4 (mind you lots of heavy lobbying going on from dh -lol)whereas I don't feel the need to inform him about his cultures - he'll get it in time.

Interesting what you say about the international school. Wonder why that is? Want to please people? Also completely agree with the sunday closing which we dropped years ago (my dh has to work sunday - so no family meals in our house sadly).

scaryteacher - Do you live in the UK? Could that be why other parents are stepping back, thinking "the locals" would do certain things better?

History, religion and law are strongly intertwined in the cultures of Britain and the middle east alike (thinking especially of Saudi Arabia) but the different places those factors have taken the respective countries is very obvious.

Possibly because their history, religion, and even law are extremely different.

That was my point, incidentally. National identity, for the most part, is a shared history, literature, cultural references, values, and direction. In a multi-cultural country, these are significantly different. How do you define national identity without mentioning any of the above? I guess you end up talking about an affection for fair play and a quirky sense of humour.

Their religion and their law are pretty much indistinguishable.

The fair play thing and rooting for the underdog are very significant, imo, as they are impulses that underlie most of the basic philosophy of British law as it has evolved.

Nope Cote, I am in Belgium.

I was also thinking may be that WW2 poster sums up the Brits - Keep calm and carry on.

How are the histories of Middle East countries and the UK "pretty much indistinguishable"?

Even where these countries' histories overlap with that of the UK, surely you realize that being on different sides of the conflict gives nations totally different perspectives and hence their shared history as a nation is entirely different than that if the British.

Hmm, scary - I do agree with quite a lot of what you say (the Brits being the volunteers at the international creches) etc. Rings very true!

But I came back to my boring burby town on a train from London the other (late-ish) evening surrounded by aggressive teenagers (at one stage they were doing the old "What you looking at" to some elderly woman) and frankly I felt rather frightened and stressed in a way in which I never felt on an evening train or tram in the ten years I lived in Belgium. The number of obvious drunks on transport here (all ages/classes) of an evening is also massively depressing. I sometimes think that I just notice these things more having lived abroad. The way that people wax lyrical about their lovely 'village' atmosphere in parts of London, for example, whilst carefully avoiding walking just a few streets away from their enclave. We have friends who, after several overseas posts with DHL came back and applied for another posting after one year, citing the nasty aggression that seems to underlie a lot of British social interaction these days.

Sorry to be of a Bank holiday (and a little off-subject), but there is much about British culture and characteristics these days (and I mean quite apart from any multicultural influence debate, I am talking 'indigenous' to use a vile BNP term) that is a bit depressing.

"How are the histories of Middle East countries and the UK "pretty much indistinguishable"?

This was not what I said, just to clarify -- what I said was that in Saudi Arabia law and religion are indistinguishable.

The history of both places (while involving the development of law and religious culture in both) has been totally separate.

While in Saudi Arabia religion and law are very much intertwined and the function of civil government seems to be to enforce religious law, to the point where the monarch must tread very, very carefully if he wants to introduce reforms in the laws regarding women's right to drive for instance, this is not the case in Britain.

mathanxiety - I have misunderstood you, because (I think) you have misunderstood me.

I wasn't saying law and religion are different than each other in Saudi Arabia. This is what I meant to say:

math: History, religion and law (...) have taken UK and Saudi Arabia to different places.

Cote: Because Saudi Arabia's history, religion, and law are extremely different than the UK's.

Riven - This ban is not about "government telling people how to dress", but rather about government clearly saying that a certain mentality is not welcome in their country: The mentality that women are temptation and should be hidden from view.

I have said this several times on this thread in response to you, but you choose not to acknowledge it, let alone answer. Why is that?

Warning to all here -- this thread will reach the magic 1003 posts in 6 more posts

Cote - Yes, that's what I was saying. I'm a bit muddled today. I think we're in agreement.

I agree too about your comment to Riven.

Nobody is contemplating telling anyone how to dress (since Europe isn't Saudi Arabia or any other part of the Middle East, after all...). What is happening is the opposite -- what not to wear, with a vast array of other options available, and the item that is being banned is something closely identified with a mentality that is considered alien.

Ah well, it's all relative. I think of the Brits as small and swarthy, not very punctual and almost bound to botch any job you set them to do . But I like them anyway

Don't get Scary's bit about the Brits standing out because of their long and varied history, though. Longer than that of the Italians? Or the Greeks? Or the French for that matter?

An American friend of mine said that the UK would be better off as a republic (sans monarch) and why didn't we try it? I explained that we had been there and done that and reinstated the monarchy as it suited us. That's what I meant by the long view and along and varied history.

I think our history is longer as a nation than the Italians as I don't think they were unified until quite late? I didn't say though that the Brits had a longer history than anyone else; just that it was long and varied.

Not so much the length or variety of the history either, imo, but the general trends apparent in that history, especially relating to law and religion and human /individual rights.

Scaryteacher, the Italians were unified under the Romans. Which was before the Angles and Saxons even arrived in this country.

Besides, you don't have to be a nation state to think of yourself as one people: the Greeks of Ancient Greece managed it though politically they were divided into tiny little city states. Didn't stop them from having a very strong feeling of their history and what set them apart from the surrounding barbarians. And I'd say theirs was an extremely varied history.

Don't get me wrong- I think the British are great.

But the history of European countries tends to be extremely varied- and actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the same went for e.g. Chinese history. Which, if I remember correctly, is rather long as a nation

If you compare with the Americans, yes then you have a point. But the Americans and the Australians and the New Zeelanders really are the odd ones out here.