British culture

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Some people are very afraid of change, unfortunately for them it's inevitable.

Absolutely, British culture has changed huge amounts over the centuries and to think it should not change any more is also a conversation that has been had for centuries.

“The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change” - Heraclitus 535-475BCE

[Carth]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Some people are very afraid of change, unfortunately for them it's inevitable.

Inevitable it may be, but I think the first post on the topic concerns whether the change is acceptable and are we, as a nation, better or worse for it.

Originally Posted by Russ

I don’t think it’s fear. I certainly don’t like change. I know in some ways it’s inevitable and I don’t expect things to stop moving on my say-so. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it.

Same here, one of my favourite phrases is "backwards in the name of progress"

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Carth

Inevitable it may be, but I think the first post on the topic concerns whether the change is acceptable and are we, as a nation, better or worse for it.



Same here, one of my favourite phrases is "backwards in the name of progress"

Change occurs whether we find it acceptable or not. Whether that change brings about progress is of course different.

The British culture/heritage is a such a melting pot of so many other diverse cultures with changes occurring to it over such a long period of time. Ultimately it will continue to change and evolve further and people will simply have to decide how much energy they're prepared to waste getting flustered/annoyed/worried/scared by such an irresistible force.

Will there be setbacks in progress in some areas? Of course, will the general progression be for the overwhelming good? I suspect so. it hasn't harmed us so far.

British culture where women play no part for many.

---------- Post added at 09:03 ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 ----------

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56840131

Sums up it British culture basically.

[Carth]

I look forward to Sharia law and all of the positives it brings.

There, it's now been said (instead of 4 pages circling the subject) . . so shoot me

[Pierre]

British Culture is fast becoming one of self flagellation, looking into the past and judging our actions by todays standards and then demanding that we apologise and are shamed by it.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The latter, Chris. People don't spend their time contemplating the former. That's why I referred to the "back of the British head"; it's in the subconscious, subliminal.

We then look at other cultures, whose behaviours, pronouncements etc differ from ours, and reach a conclusion as to whether or not our culture is under threat.

And where do you draw the line between what generates culture and what does not? Where’s the line between something through which we deduce what our culture is, and another thing through which we can’t?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chris

And where do you draw the line between what generates culture and what does not? Where’s the line between something through which we deduce what our culture is, and another thing through which we can’t?

You're still doing the former:

Originally Posted by Chris
In what sense is it derived from such things? Are you suggesting these are things from which we deduce what our culture is, or are these things whose production generates our culture? Or both?

I maintain that British culture is subliminal. However, that doesn't stop us from examining and commenting on other cultures.

Multi-culture is an interesting diversion. Let's take two examples that have similarities but also stark differences:

1 The Muslims

They derive their culture from centuries of imbuement in the Koran. When you read the Koran, its touch points on British culture are pretty much zero. There is a 90%+ uptake of the religion by British Muslim children. At the extreme end of Islam are the Iranians, Jihadists and so on.

There will be many British Muslims who have absorbed a considerable amount of British culture, but it is my perception that most of them remain governed by Islam.

2 The Jews

They derive their culture from the Old Testament, which is 50% (sort of) of the Christian influence. British Jews have integrated well into British culture and I'm sure the leakage of belief into atheism is not much different from British Christians. At the extreme end of Judaism are the Ultras who pretty-much bubble themselves into their mini-society. Their culture is based on the teachings of a particular past Rabbi in Eastern Europe. One thing the British ultras don't do is Jihad and all the terror that brings.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

You're still doing the former:

No, I'm still attempting to understand how you define culture. If it can be transmitted in certain artefacts and behaviours but not in others, and it can be generated in certain artefacts and behaviours but not in others, then I would like to know how you determine which artefacts and behaviours to look to, and which to ignore. At this point, you have still to satisfactorily justify your assertion that it is not appropriate to talk of football in terms of culture. I would like you to outline your reasoning, and not merely repeat the assertion in ever more strident terms.

I'm deliberately ignoring your mildly disturbing attempts to push the thread towards the eulogising or denigrating of certain religious and cultural tropes. I don't think you've set your stall out nearly well enough for that to be fruitful at this stage.

And your talk of 'subliminal' seems to be a fairly transparent attempt to avoid defining your meaning and intent. Sure, average people most of the time don't consciously think about what their culture is, but this is a discussion forum, discussing culture, at your own invitation. So please stop avoiding the question.

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by Russ

You're almost there.

Culture has different meanings to different people. Culture is subjective.

There may be things we enjoy today that have a basis in other cultures and countries but in my view that doesn't distract them from being what I consider to be our culture today.

Things we (as a nation) did centuries ago should not necessarily be used to define us today.

In the English language it is not subjective it has the 2 Noun definitions I outlined and a 3rd which is Verb and is where you maintain tissue or cells in a medium suitable for growth

---------- Post added at 10:20 ---------- Previous post was at 10:17 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

You're still doing the former:



I maintain that British culture is subliminal. However, that doesn't stop us from examining and commenting on other cultures.

Multi-culture is an interesting diversion. Let's take two examples that have similarities but also stark differences:

1 The Muslims

They derive their culture from centuries of imbuement in the Koran. When you read the Koran, its touch points on British culture are pretty much zero. There is a 90%+ uptake of the religion by British Muslim children. At the extreme end of Islam are the Iranians, Jihadists and so on.

There will be many British Muslims who have absorbed a considerable amount of British culture, but it is my perception that most of them remain governed by Islam.

2 The Jews

They derive their culture from the Old Testament, which is 50% (sort of) of the Christian influence. British Jews have integrated well into British culture and I'm sure the leakage of belief into atheism is not much different from British Christians. At the extreme end of Judaism are the Ultras who pretty-much bubble themselves into their mini-society. Their culture is based on the teachings of a particular past Rabbi in Eastern Europe. One thing the British ultras don't do is Jihad and all the terror that brings.

I think the extremity in Islam is a lot broader than those who are radicle. I find the acts in countries such as Saudi Arabia despicable where they throw homosexuals off buildings and behead victims of rape. Many Islamic countries are extremely extreme in how they enforce Sharia law

The Jews,Muslims and Christians all believe in the same God only Christians believe the Messiah promised Abraham through the line of Isaac has come. Muslims believe Jesus was a Prophet the same as Mohammed

Point of information - the throwing off of buildings was in Syria by Islamic State, an Islamic terrorist group.

I disagree with the way Saudia Arabia treats it's people, but they didn't do that.


Christian Pastors in the USA praised an anti-gay massacre, but I don't blame the US Government (or the US people) for that...

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Point of information - the throwing off of buildings was in Syria by Islamic State, an Islamic terrorist group.

I disagree with the way Saudia Arabia treats it's people, but they didn't do that.


Christian Pastors in the USA praised an anti-gay massacre, but I don't blame the US Government (or the US people) for that...

I sit corrected

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chris

No, I'm still attempting to understand how you define culture. If it can be transmitted in certain artefacts and behaviours but not in others, and it can be generated in certain artefacts and behaviours but not in others, then I would like to know how you determine which artefacts and behaviours to look to, and which to ignore. At this point, you have still to satisfactorily justify your assertion that it is not appropriate to talk of football in terms of culture. I would like you to outline your reasoning, and not merely repeat the assertion in ever more strident terms.

I'm deliberately ignoring your mildly disturbing attempts to push the thread towards the eulogising or denigrating of certain religious and cultural tropes. I don't think you've set your stall out nearly well enough for that to be fruitful at this stage.

And your talk of 'subliminal' seems to be a fairly transparent attempt to avoid defining your meaning and intent. Sure, average people most of the time don't consciously think about what their culture is, but this is a discussion forum, discussing culture, at your own invitation. So please stop avoiding the question.

No, I'm still attempting to understand how you define culture. If it can be transmitted in certain artefacts and behaviours but not in others, and it can be generated in certain artefacts and behaviours but not in others, then I would like to know how you determine which artefacts and behaviours to look to, and which to ignore. At this point, you have still to satisfactorily justify your assertion that it is not appropriate to talk of football in terms of culture. I would like you to outline your reasoning, and not merely repeat the assertion in ever more strident terms.

I don't know what goes on in the deep crevices of your mind, but I've tried to keep it simple in my definition. Above all, British culture is subliminal, expressing itself in people's behaviour and beliefs.
As for football, sod that; it's a distraction.

I'm deliberately ignoring your mildly disturbing attempts to push the thread towards the eulogising or denigrating of certain religious and cultural tropes. I don't think you've set your stall out nearly well enough for that to be fruitful at this stage.

Apparently not. I haven't denigrated anything. But I would like to tease out whether or not others think that British culture is under threat.

And your talk of 'subliminal' seems to be a fairly transparent attempt to avoid defining your meaning and intent. Sure, average people most of the time don't consciously think about what their culture is, but this is a discussion forum, discussing culture, at your own invitation. So please stop avoiding the question.

Definitely not. I'm quite certain that culture cannot be simply defined; Googling the question comes up with definitions like:

the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society.

You can't detail that as not only would the list be very long, the variants come into play and very few people would be able to contribute at that level in this debate.

However, since you've tried to force the point, I believe that British culture is under threat in so far as if the birth rate of an incompatible culture reaches a critical mass, laws will change as that culture asserts itself.

See: https://www.google.com/search?newwin...w=1482&bih=761

UK Muslim Demographics.
Year Pop. ±%
2001 1,600,000 +68.4%
2011 2,706,066 +69.1%
2017 3,372,996 +24.6%

Happy now?

https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...jority-by-2050

Assuming patterns of net immigration do not change significantly, the Pew Forum thinks that there will be just over 5.5 million British Muslims, representing 8.2 per cent of the UK population, by 2030.

None of this is an exact science, and some demographers say total fertility rate overestimates the lifetime fertility of immigrants because it doesn’t adjust for the fact that they tend to have children soon after arriving.

The verdict

Birth rates among native-born women are currently low across most of Europe and the developed world in general.

Demographers think a fertility rate of about 2.1 children per woman on average is necessary for the population of a developed country to sustain itself.

Most of the “native” populations of Europe are failing to have enough children, while birth rates are higher among Muslim immigrant populations, so it seems inevitable that the British Muslim population will rise in the coming decades.

But it’s equally clear that the gap in fertility between Muslim and non-Muslim will continue to lessen over time, as it has in recent decades.

Mr Cooper suggests that there are “strong cultural reasons for higher Muslim birth rates”, but this ignores the fact that birth rates have fallen dramatically in many Muslim countries.

FactCheck wouldn’t bet on the British Muslim population ever topping 10 per cent, let alone 50 per cent.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Happy now?

Yup. I'm now satisfied that this isn't an interesting, general discussion about how culture arises and changes over time, but is more likely a space for making racist assertions under pseudo-academic cover.