The authenticity of the special relationship
For the prime minister and representatives of Team Dave trying to stay cool in the Washington heat, the carefully manicured narrative they have been in town to polish is all about the deep, warm, "special" relationship between the Brits and the Yanks that stretches back generations.
It is a story built upon common respect and mutual trust founded on shared adversity. Having stood shoulder to shoulder during days when bullets have flown and blood has flowed, the US and UK enjoy a profound friendship that can withstand the occasional squabble over spilled milk or oil. So the conventional narrative goes.
To political strategists, the conventional narrative is what matters. It can bear little relation to truth but contains a magic ingredient - authenticity.
I am on holiday with my family in Florida but cannot stop myself puzzling over this "special" bond. Flicking through the hundreds of TV channels, I have bumped into a number of portrayals of the British.
There was a dumpy woman in a hat and two-piece suit endorsing a local car dealership who, it emerged, was supposed to be the Queen. A comedy show had two "frightfully-awfully" Englishmen playing croquet. A kids' programme featured a familiar British detective with deer-stalker and pipe apparently suffering from a comic overdose of etiquette.
They are quickly drawn caricatures which play to a popular narrative in which the English have blue blood while the Americans have red necks. (The Scots, Irish and Welsh are exotic in different ways.)
The screen-writers like to contrast the intense breeding and polished manners of their cousins from across the pond with the classless informality and artless sincerity of the locals. It celebrates US authenticity.
However, within the narrative there is also a sub-plot: that unpretentiousness might be mistaken for unsophistication; an anxiety that, even today, Americans might be seen by Europeans as arrivistes lacking cultural patina.
There is a concern that authenticity might be measured in centuries of natural weathering rather than the repro distress routinely applied to new blue jeans on the rack at Banana Republic. It is a contradiction that sits at the core of the relationship between the UK and the US.
When President Obama told David Cameron yesterday that British-American bonds were "truly special", he was saying the words that fitted neatly into a useful media story.
There are good reasons for both men to want to promote shared values and visions as their troops continue to fight and die together on distant battle-fields. But the special relationship is much more than a reflection of political expediency, as I discovered in the Three Broomsticks pub in Hogsmeade.
"I like to think we are bringing the British sensibility to life", my drinking companion told me. "It is about being authentic - being true to the fiction".
Mark Woodbury is the creative magician behind the Wizarding World of Harry Potter at the Universal Studios theme park in Orlando, an alchemist who searches for ways of manufacturing authenticity from fibre-glass and fireworks. "There are three essential ingredients" he revealed, "and JK Rowling provided all three."
The queue for the park's latest and very British attraction has stretched through the resort and out the front gates, such has been the power of the spell cast by the Harry Potter phenomenon.
People are wondering out loud if this can change the balance of power between the mighty Disney and its Universal rivals. So what are the three ingredients of theme park authenticity potion?
"Firstly, likeable characters that are not nostalgic, that are about today", Mr Woodbury confided over a Butterbeer. "It must also be about taking people to places they couldn't otherwise go to and there must be a great sense of adventure and action."
He explained how he had read the books to his younger daughter and realised after the first couple that "this was a theme park waiting to happen".
"But what makes this place authentic?" I asked. "We make it real" he replied, telling me how many guests are so overcome by the experience that they burst into tears as they step into the world.
JK Rowling's narrative speaks to people as powerfully as any of the political stories we read in the papers each day. The world of battling wizards and witches is no less "true" than the warring factions inside the Westminster or Washington bubbles.
It is a child of the special relationship: a British writer along with an Oscar-winning British set-designer in Stuart Craig have collaborated with some of the finest technical and creative talents in the United States to bring a very British literary series to life on the Florida swamp.
It would be easy to scoff, but Harry Potter is a multi-billion dollar global phenomenon that has inspired a world-wide fan-base structured around the traditions and manners of the English public school system.
The souvenir shops are selling uniforms, scarves and house robes to customers so desperate to purchase a slice of genuine Hogwarts that they queue for hours for the privilege of being allowed to enter the overcrowded store.
In the Harry Potter books there is a potion called Veritaserum which forces those who have drunk it to tell the truth. It takes a full moon-cycle to mature. But making truth from fiction requires a longer gestation.
"These are really, really difficult things to do" Mark Woodbury admitted. "We had a great collaboration over five years that helped us along every step of the way to ensure we made it the most authentic possible".
Manufacturing authenticity from fantasy - now that's a magic trick that the teams in the White House and Downing Street wish they could pull off every day.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~33~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Mark said:
'I am on holiday with my family'
No Mark, you are working posting on your blog.
Put down the blackberry, get your shorts on and go enjoy the sunshine, those kids won't stay kids for long.
The world outside will still turn.
When you get back refreshed from your nice relaxing family holiday (is that an oxymoron) you will be able to get back to work with gusto.
Happy holiday.
Complain about this comment
Enjoy your holiday, Mark.
As for lord snooty - poodle.
The idea that what remains of 'british' is something to be proud of is pure nostalgia. Snooty is continuing the decline.
Complain about this comment
When Obama declared Britain to be America's closest friend and ally, I think he meant "Indirectly through Canada".
It is also not the politicians that have the US-UK special relationship, the politics is clearly one-sided: e.g. the Gary McKinnon case.
I think it's also down to stereotypical British Eccentricity, and the American lust for quirky entertainment. Though, I am not so sure Britain would give any respect to America if it was not a powerful country. The media that it exports is mediocre at best, they just produce an awful lot of it.
I don't hear much about a UK-Ireland special relationship, but I feel that the relationship is far closer than the UK-US one.
Complain about this comment
Hi Mark,
A holiday in Florida eh? I wish I was there.
Instead, I'm stuck in the office in Hayes looking out over Heathrow at all those people jetting off on summer hols.
As for the 'special relationship', I think too much emphasis is placed upon it. I don't disagree with it, in general, but we have good relationships with many nations, and all too often, the UK/US relationship takes centre stage.
Many US citizens are descendants of British, Irish and other EU nationals. Much of that is historic, and so it goes that the Americans have a traditional or historic view of us. Epcot is a perfect example of this. There is little in common when it comes to cultural links, although it varies from city to city and state to state. Maybe it is the cultural 'Britain' that should be promoted more.
Having travelled around the US quite extensively in the past, I am often amused by some of the comments I receive from 'ordinary' Americans. One such comment, 5 or 6 years ago I suppose, was in response to a comment I'd made about a certain popular brand of American beer, and how I'd said we get the brand in the UK, but not the 'lite' version available on tap in the US. He was amazed, like 'wow, you guys have Bud in the UK'. Little did he know we brew it here under license :)
Another time was meeting a couple from Montana. They'd never left the state before, and had joined the same ship as us out of Port Everglades. It was their first time out of Montana. They had trouble believing that we had travelled all the way from London, via New York and then driven all the way down the east coast (I-95). No disrespect meant, of course. I know people in the UK who haven't even left their village, and Montana is a large state.
Anyway, the point is, any political 'special relationship' is just that. We have historical links with the people, but that is for each to forge, and from my perspective, I find the Americans such friendly people and so easy to get along with, that I don't need any 'special relationship' in order to feel welcome there.
Complain about this comment
Like most relationships, it looks better with some alcohol in the system.
'Special' ??
'Authentic' ??
Hmm... 'convenient' more like it these days.
Complain about this comment
Dear Mark
Should the urge be to get away from Kissimmee to the Gulf Coast, could you please let us know how much oil is actually on the beaches? Oh and watch out for hurricanes.
Complain about this comment
An illusion of the world as illusion. Pretty much sums up modern society.
Complain about this comment
Bobrocket - could you be more patronizing?
Complain about this comment
there is nothing special about our relationship with the USA.
underhand maybe but not special :0
Enjoy your hols Mark we get value for money from you :P
I am on holiday with my family in Florida but cannot stop myself puzzling over this "special" bond.
Go play.....
Complain about this comment
From a Brummie who has lived in Florida for 43 years you who wish you were here would probably not relish the 100F temperatures that we are currently enduring in our town, which is about 90 minutes drive north of Disneyworld. I don't know what has happened to our Mark who writes the America column, but take this opportunity to suggest that Mr. Cameron would be well advised to stick to his economic guns while talking to the man in the White House, who is hell bent on making the U.S. a Third World country with his out-of-control spending. Mr.Cameron, with his deep cuts in all areas of government, has wisely ignored the suggestion of Obama to the G20 summit recently to keep spending, and taken the only way to ease the shaky economy in Britain. I applaud the new regime in the UK and hope that come November we can dilute the power of the man who promised so much on the campaign trail and has delvered NOTHING but a crushing debt.
Complain about this comment
The British poster-boy for the hard-right neo-fascists,meets the American poster-boy for the American left-liberal movement,they exchange gifts that their advisers have supplied,their diplomatic entourage get down to work thrashing out the details of their respective statements to the worlds press,and they have a nice meal,maybe take in a show,then its off in separate directions,one goes back to his office,the other on a "tour" of the nicer parts of the US,before jetting back home to tell the British press that the meeting went well and that he pressed his case for British interests.Nothing of substance as far as press reportage goes,plenty of behind-the-scenes activity regarding the progress of the efforts to finish the pipeline from the Caspian to the Turkish gulf,with the entry of Turkey to the EU as a requirement of Europe's position to benefit from the oil(and profits) that will flow from said pipeline.America and Britain share some extremely lucrative vested interests as well as being two countries separated by the same language and (dis)similar culture.When Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Spencer Churchill were in constant communication,it was actually Harry Hopkins(Roosevelt's envoy to Britain)that spoke warmly of Winston,Roosevelt infamously referred to Winston as "that drunken bum!",the "special relationship" has always been more of a propaganda device of two military allies exercising political expediency,than any kind of genuine rapport or friendship.Bush and Blair got on as well as one would expect a lawyer and a recovering alcoholic with the IQ of a donkey would.Never-the-less,Britain and America have,since the end of the(American)war of independence,backed each other up in two world wars and numerous smaller conflicts around the globe,so I guess that amounts to something.Its not really news-worthy though,and really just the journalists way of filling media space with inconsequential data,(famous man flies off to see other famous man in order to be photographed together,woop de doo,break out the flags.......zzzzzzz....
Complain about this comment
The special relationship is, they tell us what to do, and we do it quicker than anyone else.
Complain about this comment
3. At 4:40pm on 21 Jul 2010, Rob wrote:
When Obama declared Britain to be America's closest friend and ally, I think he meant "Indirectly through Canada".
It is also not the politicians that have the US-UK special relationship, the politics is clearly one-sided: e.g. the Gary McKinnon case.
I don't know why people keep saying this. If anyone had actually bothered to look at the stats Britain has requested about 30 extraditions from the US and approx 22 have been granted. The US has requested about 50 and had about 35 granted. The idea that extradition is purely one way is a complete myth.
Equally I have no idea why extradition within the EU is not as harshly criticised. Britain obeys the EU common arrest policy perfectly. If the Germans want a Brit arrested (even for something like holocaust denial that isn't illegal here) a British cop will show up on your doorstep and you can expect to be in Berlin in return. However the Germans have refused to extradite that locum GP who killed a Brit with a morphine overdose recently and when a German stalked killed a man in my home town of Nottingham extradition was only granted after we agreed to a raft of outrageous conditions (max sentence 20 years, return to Germany earlier etc). The French constitution doesn't allow extradition to the UK at all (a strange case where EU law does not outrank domestic) and as such several French child killers have been serving sentences in France, not here.
On a related note perhaps someone should explain why I should have any sympathy for Gary McKinnon? This is a man so clever he can hack into the most secure computers on earth. Rather than earn millions (and pay 40% of that in tax) he claims unemployment benefit and sits in his bedroom hunting UFO's. He has now run up a truly enormous legal aid bill fighting extradition for a crime he admits doing. Frankly I'd rather he was sent to the US and then the US taxpayer can pay his bills rather than us.
Complain about this comment
#11 "The British poster-boy for the hard-right neo-fascists, meets the American poster-boy for the American left-liberal movement"
If you think Cameron is either hard right or a neo-fascist (something that is actually a contradiction in terms... fascism is not hard right as it involves some very socialist policies. Hard right is US republicanism) then you have no idea what either term means. Politically Cameron is slightly to the left of Obama.
Roosevelt may well have referred to Churchill as a 'drunken bum' but Roosevelt averaged 12 martinis a day so was only slightly behind Winston's Pol Roger and Brandy consumption. Churchill's mother was of course American born too.
Complain about this comment
I am a Brit that has been living and working in the US for the last 10 months. In my experience I think that the US is hugely supportive and attracted by the UK. The average man in the street here knows little about life in the UK but seems to have an understanding and appreciation of most things British. The Americans that I know who have visited the UK think that our country is wonderful and love to talk about the places they have visited. There are some interesting lessons that the Brits can learn from our US friends. Whilst the average American does not have the same general cultural understanding that the average Brit has they certainly have a much stronger moral philosophy and code. Americans are also some of the most patriotic people that I have met. The support for their country is unwavering and frankly it is a pleasure to see. The avergae Brit I don't think really takes a moments notice of what their country represents unless it comes to supporting the national football team abroad.
For me there is very much a special relationship, which is no better described than a sign inside the terminal at Boston Logan airport. It is a picture of a US and Union flag crossed with the words underneath "standing together". It brings a lump to my throat every time I see it.
Complain about this comment
Our relationship with America is at worst necessary and at best essential and beautiful.
Stop being small minded and be glad of the association we have. Like all friends, feelings can becnme stormy, but it is always a storm in a tea cup. (coffee cup) We need each other for different reasons.
All the things I love about the Yanks;
[1] great accent
[2] gift of the gab
[3] always polite
[4] positive thinkers
(5) they are free
just like us
etc etc
Complain about this comment
Special relationship? If it's so special, how come David Cameron's visit hasn't even prompted a mention in the news media here. I bet if Obama were in the UK, it'd be featured on the BBC and other news channels. As a Brit living temporarily in the USA, it's clear to see that the UK isn't on the radar. Sure, they like the accent, but could they pinpoint the country on a map or pick David Cameron out in an ID parade. Doubtful. We might think we're special, we might think our relationship's special, but Americans simply focus on America. The world stops at the borders.
Complain about this comment
Ah the old "Special Relationship", do you mean the one where we bend over and allow everything American to enter us...
The Americans have practically achieved world domination with their "Special Relationships", people call it business though because it's private companies (McDonalds anyone?) doing their bit at getting Americanised brands into countries, but in the end scheme of things it's just America taking over and introducing their culture where it's not wanted.
We should've just given in and let Hitler invade, instead of getting aid from the US, maybe our society wouldn't be as broken as it is now if we had...
Complain about this comment
Mark Easton.
"However, within the narrative there is also a sub-plot: that unpretentiousness might be mistaken for unsophistication; an anxiety that, even today, Americans might be seen by Europeans as arrivistes lacking cultural patina."
yes, and I thought that the programmes on BBC4 TV presented by Rich Hall give us 'average' Europeans a good insight into the American psyche; only one is available on iPlayer though.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00t26zf/Rich_Halls_The_Dirty_South/
http://wscdn.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/tv/bbc_four/2010-07-21
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Americans love Brits. We are a nation of bumbling idiots. Forgive us and we'll forgive you. We need to help each other.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark, no need to worry about that tropical storm. It's hurricanes you need to be prepared for. Enjoy Florida.
Complain about this comment
@ 13. Peter Sym
Re the arrest warrant - it's very simple: the agreement reached at EU level allows states to refuse to extradite their own citizens and for the sentence to be served domestically. All states did this except Britain which goldplated the agreement to allow not only for extradition of its own nationals, but also for them to serve their sentences abroad.
Complain about this comment
13. At 11:33am on 22 Jul 2010, Peter_Sym wrote:
On a related note perhaps someone should explain why I should have any sympathy for Gary McKinnon?
--------------------------------------
Because he didn't "hack", he accessed computers without a password.
Because when he commited his "unauthorised access", the US punishment for the crime was a few years. After the incident, the law was changed to make what he did punishable by several decades (multiple times longer than committing a murder). The US also insist on trying Gary on these revised laws.
It's not legal to access computers you know you shouldn't be accessing, though, if the US intelligence agencies leaves their computers without a configured Administrator password. It's somewhat similar to police saying "If you leave your house unlocked, you can expect to be burgled."
It's unfair, unjust, and it's an example of America using it's weight to bully Britain into accepting unfair circumstances, When has Britain done that to America?
Complain about this comment
"Scottish ministers and officials have turned down a request to attend a US Senate hearing next week over the release of the Lockerbie bomber. Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill and the Scottish Prison Service's medical chief Dr Andrew Fraser were invited."--BBC
Don't want to look the Americans in the eye, eh? A little ashamed, perhaps? Fact is, both the UK and the USA have been neglecting their "special relationship" in favor of more local benefits. Perhaps it is time to declare the special relationship dead and to cancel all trading and defense agreements. We can each go it alone perfectly well, can't we?
Complain about this comment
"some of the finest technical and creative talents in the United States to bring a very British literary series to life on the Florida swamp."--
It is a sorry fact that Disney and all of its hangers-on have wrecked a very fine swamp ecosystem. You may not care for the swamp, but it is home to hundreds of unique species. Unfortunately none are of such prime economic importance as another plastic coated fake "world", even one built on good solid British fiction. There's only one good thing about this blight. Concentrated as it is, it is not spread out over the rest of the state.
Greetings from a Florida native.
Complain about this comment
Jacques Bouvier #26.
"Don't want to look the Americans in the eye, eh?"
(1) Alex Salmond SMP has stated, on BBC2 Newsnight, that all documents relating to al-Megrahi's transfer are already in the public domain, excepting only ministerial communications.
(2) the one's who don't want to use their eyes to see appear to be the Americans. how else would you explain that the dowing of the Iranian airliner in July 1988, with a loss of 290 civilian lives, never gets mentioned by your precious senators?? afaik, there has never been an apology for this incident.
Complain about this comment
There is only one special relationship the US has and that is the one with Israel. Anyone who spends any time in the US will quickly realise that the UK barely gets any coverage let alone any mention of a so called special relationship. Grow up Britain and stop looking backwards.
Complain about this comment
#8 Idrinkyourmilkshake
I wasn't being patronising, merely facetious.
Mark posted his blog @ 11:29am UK time which makes it around 6:30 in the morning in Florida.
The joys of children, even when you are on holiday from work you have to get up at the crack of dawn.
The UK/US governmental 'Special Relationship' ended in Dec 2006 when we paid off the last of the War debt, no longer was our government the subserviant debtor that could not rail too much against the master in case he suddenly called his debt in.
The 'Special Relationship' between the people hasn't changed a bit, we share a common(ish) language and share common cultural aspects (US redneck = UK D.Mail reader :), we like to think there are big differences (them and us) but when we holiday in each others countries we see that on the whole, people are people wherever you go, only the food and the placenames are different.
Complain about this comment
Thought you'd already been on holiday Mark as your last blog was ten days ago.
Meanwhile the US political elite may be working up a synthetic or diversionary rage against BP but they have a point regarding the 'compassionate' release of al-Megrahi.
The furthest thing from an SNP minister's mind is compassion. The first thing is getting one over on London and heightening the separation or autonomy of Scotland. no matter the issue.
It is wrong to say "as Alex Salmond stated on BBC2 Newsnight, that all documents relating to al-Megrahi's transfer are already in the public domain, excepting only ministerial communications."
The original medical opinion on the murderer has not been released. And why did Scottish Justice Minister MacAskill break normal protocol and visit Megrahi in prison? Would an ill child murderer get such personal attention?
Scotland gets medical reports monthly on Megrahi's medical condition. Why can't we see them? Why does no BBC journalist ask Salmond about that, seeing as he and Kenny have bottled out of going to Washington?
Complain about this comment
Hows Florida? I'm too poor to go there, got to pay my telly tax to the ruling politburo or violent men will kick my door down.
This special relationship only belongs to you and your friends at oxford and cambridge.
The rest of us serfs have to work for a living.
Complain about this comment
The, 'special relationship', consists of nothing more than grinning, imbecilic British politicians saying, '...yes mister president...'.
Complain about this comment
Referring to Americans as "Yanks" is like calling the English "Limeys".
Why such derogatory language , Mark? Do the English really hate us that much?
Complain about this comment
As an American who has lived in the Uk for 40 years, I can say the special relationship is a British fiction, which the US gov't panders to because it suits US foreign policy.
The US gov't doesn't give a fig about Britain (because the US people don't) and if the UK stopped being a very useful foreign relations ally, the 'special relationship' would disappear like snow in July.
Complain about this comment
Where was the so called special relationship in 1914 or 1939 and 1956 ( Suez Crisis ) or 1982 ( Falklands War ).
No where to be seen and in 1956, not just nowhere to be seen, but actively stabbing the UK in the back.
Then the fiasco of Lend-Lease after WW2, where the UK on its knees financially was still made to pay back the millions of dollars loaned. But oh no not the germans, they had billions of dollars of aid poured in.
We were only the so called "special ally", but of course germany was more useful as a buffer against soviet agression.
1982, "oh no we can't do too much to help you, we might alienate our special relationship". With our special dictator friends in argentina.
"Special relationship", don't make me laugh.
Complain about this comment
OwainGlyndwr #36.
""Special relationship", don't make me laugh."
except, perhaps, in finance; the City and the US market makers do appear to work hand in glove -- for their benefit and to the exclusion of everybody else.
Complain about this comment
That ole special relationship :
1. American Multi-nationals (such as credit co's, supermarkets) buy out entire UK industries, keeping brand names but not the loyal staff.
2. USA Moves all the UK income to USA
3. US Co's Move Operations to India, undercutting costs putting all remaining UK Co's out of buisiness unless they follow suite.
Complain about this comment
Like all countries, the US only has one special relationship: that with itself. If the Scottish Parliament proposed to hold an enquiry into a possible linkage between Dick Cheney's close relationship with Halliburton and the decision to go to war in Iraq, its chances of getting official US cooperation would be nil. But when the boot is on the other foot, the US view is entirely different. Ditto BP and the oil disaster. Compare US official reaction to that with its reaction to the US company Union Carbide's disaster in Bhopal where thousands were killed and many still continue to suffer. Ditto the putative Lockerbie bomber. During WW2 a special Japanese unit carried out horrific biological experiments on thousands of Chinese and some allied prisoners. Rather than hanging the guy in charge, the US gave him immunity in the vain hope that the unit's "scientific" findings might be of use to the US. Another of those irregular verbs: I serve the national interest; you set an unfortunate precedent; he betrays the victims.
Complain about this comment
America the master, Britain the slave - that is the 'special relationship'. The irony is, some pats at the back of the British Prime Ministers, they think 'special relationship' is alive and kicking. Do you need concrete example of 'special relationship'? The largest British company 'BP' will be run by the Master, not by the slave anymore. The head of BP had been threatened with kicks in the asses, American boot on his neck etc - all in the name of 'special relationship'.
Long live 'special relationship'!
Complain about this comment
The "Special relationship" is one of US exploitation of the UK. Remember following WWII, the US made the UK pay back every single penny of "loans" for supplies we had, it took until 2006 to repay it. Other countries (e.g. France) simply told the US it wasn't going to repay, and was excused. The US is no friend of the UK.
Complain about this comment
Regarding the special relationship, I have just seen Senator Robert Menendez excoriate the UK personnel who have refused to appear before his inquiry into the release of the putative Lockerbie bomber. As a result,I wish publicly to ask him the following questions:
1. Having seen the self-serving pantomime his colleagues made of BP's CEO appearing before them, would any sane individual agree to do likewise? I will always hold in particular contempt the guy who asked the "Thursday" question. It may have played well at home, but from this side of the pond it seemed childish in the extreme. As Union Carbide had in Bhopal, BP has a lot of questions to answer; but so crudely playing to the gallery was no way to illicit them.
2. It is noteworthy that the only Lockerbie dead he referred to were Americans. Were these the only deaths that counted?
3. The way many of us read the situation is that BP is an easy target because it is foreign. Would Senator Menendez be prepared to scotch this suggestion by running a joint inquiry into the Halliburton/Cheney connection to the decision to invade Iraq along with that into the release of the Libyan? If the UK parliament set up one on its own, would he recommend that all relevant US personnel appear before it?
Complain about this comment
You will see above that I have put up a post asking US Senator Robert Menendez to answer questions arising out of his recent statement concerning the inquiry into the release of the "Lockerbie Bomber". My innate British sense of fare play required my e-mailing a copy to him. Unfortunately, such is his openness to worldwide opinion, his system will only accept correspondence coming from an address with a Zip Code and US phone number. I wonder if one of our US readers would therefor do me the service of passing the questions on?
Complain about this comment
I find the degree of vitriol on both sides disgusting. First, as Britons should recognise that being the "Top Dog" on the heap of nations isn't easy. Great Britain did her fair share of taking advantage during her reign as the British Empire. The U.S. have made many mistakes however in looking at the total picture it looks like a winner in several respects. The U.S. superpower period have seen such things as vast medical advancements (what with polio almost being forecast as extinct in a few more years), surgical advances such as ontological (keyhole) surgery, octal laser surgery, etc. Space exploration to the outer reaches of the known Universe, upcoming New Horizons space probe by NASA to explore sub planet Pluto in 2015, etc. Computer advancement that have resulted in our modern way of communicating to each other and postings on blogs and other venue. It goes on and on however better products and services are available now from being created by the free people of both Great Britain and the United States.
One has to admit that things are a lot better now than 65 years ago when the world was emerging tepidly from the most horrendous experience of mankind, World War II. I believe that the British-American "Special Relationship" has resulted in a world that is no longer dominated by such ilk as Hitler, Tojo and Stalin. Millions perished from the evil actions of these insane dictators. I don't care how mad you get at the U.S., we don't have 70 million deaths of innocents on our collective conscience. Our concern now is that these petty vultures whom want to be dictators in such places as Iran and North Korea don't use their small and crude nuclear arsenals to cause a situation that could result in catastrophic global war.
Please think before typing such as that one previous comment said that it would have been better that the British should have thrown in with the Germans. With all of their genocide against coloured and ethnic populations during the time of the Third Reich, HOW COULD YOU EVEN MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT as that? The British people are made of much better stock than to kneel before a totalitarian regime that have murderous intentions. Just because you have a minor snit with the U.S. political administrations of late doesn't mean that you get to forget your moral and legal obligations to global mankind. We Yanks and you Brits shall stand shoulder to shoulder in the future regardless of what politicians temporarily inhabit the White House and 10 Downing Street. For we two peoples are the "Special Relationship." Let's not forget this!
Complain about this comment
Billy Bones wrote:
"Please think before typing such as that one previous comment said that it would have been better that the British should have thrown in with the Germans. With all of their genocide against coloured and ethnic populations during the time of the Third Reich, HOW COULD YOU EVEN MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT as that?"
I could not find the original comment, but anybody foolish enough to have said that should simply be ignored. Ditto about the US standing by throughout WW1, WW2, and the Falklands. In all three conflicts, US involvement was vital to the UK. Suez was a sort of betrayal, but colluding with France and Israel to invade Egypt was not a very smart idea. All that said, nobody can reasonably expect Britons to stand by as precisely the kind of self-serving politicians Hollywood has taught us to despise, kick a UK company to pieces simply because that is where they see their personal political interests lying. Amongst others, millions of UK pensioners rely on BP dividends. When the results of all the proper inquiries are in, BP and the several US companies involved will have to answer for their actions in court. In the meantime opportunist politicians should try to curb their lust for publicity.
Complain about this comment
Billy Bones #44.
well, where to begin?
"One has to admit that things are a lot better now than 65 years ago when the world was emerging tepidly from the most horrendous experience of mankind, World War II. I believe that the British-American "Special Relationship" has resulted in a world that is no longer dominated by such ilk as Hitler, Tojo and Stalin. Millions perished from the evil actions of these insane dictators. I don't care how mad you get at the U.S., we don't have 70 million deaths of innocents on our collective conscience."
let's see:
Korea: following the division of the country by the US of A in 1945, more than 2,000,000 civilians were killed in the war that resulted.
Vietnam: the US of A played a prominent role in this conflict too, an estimated 2,000,000 civilians were killed.
since it rather tedious (and time-consuming, I haven't got all day!!) to provide a full list of US actions, I post a few more links:
Coups Arranged or Backed by the USA
Civilian Victims of USA Foreign Policy
the total number of civilians killed may not yet have reached "70 million", but you're well on the way. ;(
of course, US American corporations (other than the military/'defense' sector) often benefit too: http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa04.html
"Our concern now is that these petty vultures whom want to be dictators in such places as Iran and North Korea don't use their small and crude nuclear arsenals to cause a situation that could result in catastrophic global war."
on can argue, with some justification, that both Iran and North Korea are as hostile (and vengeful?) because of prior US and UK interference, remember Shah Reza Pahlavi??
"With all of their [Nazis] genocide against coloured and ethnic populations during the time of the Third Reich, HOW COULD YOU EVEN MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT as that?"
I find this statement quite ironic, coming from a citizen of the state that gave us Guantanamo and extraordinary renditions, a state which has the highest percentage of its own citizens incarcerated -- a disproportionate number of whom are black or hispanic.
"The British people are made of much better stock than to kneel before a totalitarian regime that have murderous intentions."
right, an excellent argument for why the UK ought to distance herself from the US of A.
"Just because you have a minor snit with the U.S. political administrations of late doesn't mean that you get to forget your moral and legal obligations to global mankind."
that too is pretty hilarious, coming from an US citizen. the US of A's approach to the United Nations tells a different story, have you heard of John Bolton (US ambassador to the UN)? some see him as answerable for war crimes!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/2041908/John-Bolton-to-be-target-of-citizens-arrest-at-Hay-Festival.html
"It goes on and on however better products and services are available now from being created by the free people of both Great Britain and the United States."
yes, like shackles and related 'torture technologies', and the handguns and rifles so popular with drug cartels from Colombia to Mexico.
frankly, I think that your understanding of history is mostly shaped by Hollywood, 'Blackhawk Down', eh?
Complain about this comment
"Special relationship"?
Oh please, give me a break.
Many in Washington laugh at British politicians behind their hands while many in London sneer into their whiskeys about americans.
There is indeed specialness on many levels between the peoples of the two countries but so far as politicians are concerned it is by turns either a millstone or a one-minute sound-bite. Political love is driven wholly and solely by the concern of politicians for their own future electability and the temperature of the 'special relationship', USA-to-UK, has just been notched down significantly by OB in the White House.
Clawing for ballot-box favour ahead of November's mid-term senate elections he allowed his own personal and abiding prejudices to show through during the set-up stage for this summer's rape and pillage of BP by american press and senators, themselves equally craven. OB's signals authorised a season of extraordinary hysteria, chauvinism and self-inflation by various Washington chancers, culminating in some hilariously pretentious posturing this week by committee senators claiming indignant outrage on their constituents' behalf over the freeing of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.
Although handled gently at the time by Cameron, with the sort of bemused compassion that one reserves for doddering friends who have plainly lost their marbles, he has no second thoughts now in demonstrating in a few straight-talking foreign policy speeches exactly what america will be missing from the UK for the foreseeable future in terms of a compliant foreign policy partner. There is much more to come and there are many in westminster who will now relish the long, slow discomforture of america abroad for the rest of OB's administration without familiar british voices in their chorus line.
Not a fig for any such 'special relationship', therefore.
Complain about this comment
Regarding jr4412's detailed attack of US foreign policy, he might care to reflect who, in the whole history of humanity, having such power has used it more benignly? For most of the period the US was confronted by another super-power prepared to use any means at its disposal to extend its reach. In places like Korea and Vietnam America did not get involved because it liked feeding its young men into a mincing machine. The over arching principle was the "domino theory", the idea that left unchecked authoritarian communism would simply gobble up country after country. Given that that was precisely what Russian had done in Eastern Europe after WW2, it did not strike me at the time as being an implausible theory. Indeed, had not the US put its own nuclear security on the line, I remain fairly certain that Russia would have pushed much further into Europe. No doubt the large numbers of virulently anti-American fellow-travellers about at the time would have been of considerable help in that regard.
Please do not think that I am in any way an admirer of all that the US has done. All too often it has seemed to me a strange combination of naivety, brutality and naked self-interested. However what I am sure of is that no other great power has a better (or less bad)record and most behaved a great deal worse. To link this with my earlier posts, I have two pet-hates: knee-jerk anti-Americans, and self-serving politicians so mistakenly sure of their own crystal purity that they think they can occupy the morale high-ground unchallenged.
Complain about this comment
Mike Waller #48.
"Regarding jr4412's detailed attack of US foreign policy, he might care to reflect who, in the whole history of humanity, having such power has used it more benignly? ... However what I am sure of is that no other great power has a better (or less bad)record and most behaved a great deal worse."
you appear to start from the assumption that the (mis-)use of power is legitimate in itself, while my argument is not about relative moral and ethical values.
arguably, post-WWII policies of the US of A have been entirely self-serving, are the shackles any less effective simply because our current jailer chose to upholster them?
you might "care to reflect" why it is necessary to spend in excess of $650bn pa on weapons.
here in the UK we are bombarded by advertisements for charitable causes on a daily basis; typically, we're asked to contribute £3 per month to supply an African child with food/water/education, $650bn (~£450bn) would allow to lift approximately 39bn children out of poverty (there are of course fewer than 7bn people alive on our planet).
anyway, IMO the post-WWII policies of the US of A have corroded human rights rather than promoted them and have impoverished and deprived (of opportunity) billions of people (quite apart from the loss of lives), and I for one am not comfortable with that knowledge.
"Please do not think that I am in any way an admirer of all that the US has done. All too often it has seemed to me a strange combination of naivety, brutality and naked self-interested."
you write 'seemed' -- past tense, what changed your mind? what is your opinion now?
"I have two pet-hates: knee-jerk anti-Americans, and self-serving politicians so mistakenly sure of their own crystal purity that they think they can occupy the morale high-ground unchallenged."
I do not consider my critical view of US American policies a "knee-jerk" reaction, a lot of thinking and years of observation have gone into that; also I think it is important to distinguish between the state and its actions, and the individual american citizen.
to end on a positive note: we are all entitled to our opinions and thought, as of now, is still free, even if very little else is. ;)
Complain about this comment
There may well be many people around the world who consider themselves as "in jail" because the US supports the regime that oppresses them. However, I have never bought into the idea that I, too, have been similarly imprisoned and made to do and think things that I would not otherwise do. Frankly, this is just the kind of knee-jerk nonsense to which I object. My own reading of post-war Britain's experience is that in consequence not least of Marshall Aid and Nato we have been spared the crushing defeats that usually befall great empires in their terminal stages. For example, what other emergent great power would not have simply seized Canada and told us to go hang? Could it just be that anglo-Americans do actually pay a bit more than lip-service to at least some of the values we espouse?
Complain about this comment
Mike Waller #50.
"My own reading of post-war Britain's experience is that in consequence not least of Marshall Aid and Nato we have been spared the crushing defeats that usually befall great empires in their terminal stages."
and that is your justification for the appalling circumstances in which the overwhelming majority of peoples in Africa, Asia, South- and Central-America try to survive? really??
maybe you ought to think yourself lucky (as I do) for having been born into circumstances where we don't have fear and fight for our lives every day; remember, all of us begin our existence with an accident of birth.
"..anglo-Americans.."
other races and cultures are no less valuable for not being of Anglo-Saxon 'stock'.
you ought to (re-)examine your true motivations, Mr Waller.
Complain about this comment
this isnt the relationship that we need to worry about...its the special relationship that mr cameron and the lib dems are trying to forge with india....
i would really like to know the fine details of any trade agreements...and you will find how foolish the brits will be again as with the US.
the major benefactors of any deal between india and the UK will ofcourse be India by a long shot with long term negative effects on britain, on its workers, on its position, on its values etc.
Complain about this comment
There is no special relationship, merely a strategic defence policy on our part. Consecutive British Governments have become addicted to the American teat.
The political elite are somewhat in awe of the potential power and money in American politics. For the self-serving amongst us, it is the stuff dreams are made of. Just as hacks love their jollies and where better than Ameriland. Europe you can do on a weekend break at your own expense.
America is cool, the establishment have whored out the nation to hang out with the coolest kid in school. Chipper little underdog, merrily punching above our weight. Politicians of all descriptions love to think their opinion matters.
In return we get a few nukes on the cheap, we can't build our own. We cannot maintain an independent nuclear deterrent, we lack the capability. Just as we could not maintain a position of Global consequence. But every now and then America pampers her pet and gives us a little pat on the head to humour.
So we are all fur coat and no knickers, if America were Burberry then Britain would as a Nation dress itself up from head to toe. Still we should worry less, for one day there will be a new kid to take America's place. Will Britain still be a whore or a wrinkled old hag on the make. Was Britannia a battleaxe or a cougar?
Complain about this comment
" At 3:02pm on 29 Jul 2010, jr4412 wrote:
Mike Waller #50.
"My own reading of post-war Britain's experience is that in consequence not least of Marshall Aid and Nato we have been spared the crushing defeats that usually befall great empires in their terminal stages."
and that is your justification for the appalling circumstances in which the overwhelming majority of peoples in Africa, Asia, South- and Central-America try to survive? really??
maybe you ought to think yourself lucky (as I do) for having been born into circumstances where we don't have fear and fight for our lives every day; remember, all of us begin our existence with an accident of birth."
Reread what I said. As I have made clear, I am by no means uncritical of US foreign policy. However, I strongly reject your simplistic notion that US hegemony has somehow enslaved me. Making such unsustainable claims mortally damages your wider argument. Stick to the facts.
Complain about this comment
Mike Waller #54.
"..I strongly reject your simplistic notion that US hegemony has somehow enslaved me.."
not enslaved, failed to liberate (hence 'current jailer' (#49)).
on paper, one of the best bill of rights but the reality is very different indeed (for instance, if you were a 17 year old black male you'd have a better chance of being in prison than being in college); anyway, I refer you back to the links provided in #46.
"Stick to the facts."
please, feel free to point out where I didn't.
Complain about this comment
I don't know why we continually have to return to this question. There is no special relationship. Force majeure is force majeure. When the USA wants the UK, or Europe for that matter, they beckon and we come running. When they don't, they do their own thing. Examples? Iran, Iraq, war on terror, global financial collapse... There is no special relationship. The worst is that we create this myth and US politicans are happy to endorese it.
Complain about this comment
Dear jr4412,
I find your type of anti-American jealousy quite refreshing. Of course it means that I'm getting under your skin. Please mate, I'm just some dumb Yank however I still love the British as we've had this "Special Relationship" for quite some time. Further to refer to the U.S. actions of the last 60 years as compared to the 70 million deaths of 6 years from 1939 to 1945, well mate, they're laughable. What's the old saying, "Comparing apples to oranges." At this rate we should be well into the 24th century before anything approaching 70 million deaths occur by U.S. military and naval forces. Of course should you want to check this with the cost of a calculator from Woolworth's or Marks and Sparks which would bear this out. My point was that Hitler, Tojo and Stalin all have a lot more blood on their hands than both Britain and America. Of course my history books aren't as anti British and American as some!
That you assume that we went into Korea unilaterally is also laughable on your part. Should you care to check your facts on this as well mate you would find that once the Soviet Union delegation stormed out of the United Nations Security Council, the remaining members voted that all member country's military and naval forces could be sent to Korea. This included British, American, Greek, Turkish and many more than space here allows. No mate, we went into Korea with Mum's (United Nations) consent. It's a silly fact however it's a fact just as well. When your precious United Nations gave her consent then to totally blame the U.S. is a LIE on your part. I accept your apology, mate, as your anti-Americanism got in your way of correctly interpreting history.
"With all of their [Nazis] genocide against coloured and ethnic populations during the time of the Third Reich, HOW COULD YOU EVEN MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT as that?"
I find this statement quite ironic, coming from a citizen of the state that gave us Guantanamo and extraordinary renditions, a state which has the highest percentage of its own citizens incarcerated -- a disproportionate number of whom are black or hispanic."
Yes, mate, let's discuss Guantanamo a bit. To compare Guantanamo to such places as Auschwitz and Belsen-Belsen is also laughable on your part. Gosh, darn! How many Islamic terrorists have we gassed with Xyklon-B gas canisters today? Then after their writhing throes of coughing and finally fatal gasps we burned their bodies. How many bodies of Islamic terrorists have we burned into ashes and exhausted out through smoke stacks, several tens of metres tall? What mate, you didn't mention Auschwitz and Belsen-Belsen? Please reference my statement,
"With all of their [Nazis] genocide against coloured and ethnic populations during the time of the Third Reich, HOW COULD YOU EVEN MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT as that?"
By talking about Nazis and Third Reich I did infer these horrible places of Auschwitz and Belsen-Belsen in my original statement. The Nazis built these camps strictly for murdering millions. That you didn't make reference to these places doesn't excuse your mixing of historical fact regarding Auschwitz and Guantanamo. Please reference the latest report from International Committee of Red Cross about Guantanamo whom have no mention of murder down there. Mate, if you want to compare Guantanamo with these places then so be it however you're sadly mistaken in this view. Guantanamo is a weekend picnic compared to the Nazi death camps. To compare the two means that you're not really sincere in your opinions. You just throw up Guantanamo as a knee jerk anti-American claptrap, which is your right. However it makes you look a real tosspot!
Yes, that we have a lot of our citizens in gaol and prison is disconcerting. The vast majority are of Anglo Saxon origin which we deplore however some people have trouble with modern society. Does not Great Britain have H.M. Prison's? However a large majority of these U.S. inmates are given free cable colour television, exercise yards, ping pong tables, basketball courts, air conditioned cells, nutritious meals, etc. Somehow my reading of history didn't find these sorts of amenities availed to inmates of Auschwitz. If you find such in historical references of Auschwitz then please bring them to my attention. Thanks mate as I know that you want a true account of historical fact! Why let a bit of anti-Americanism get in the way of truth? It's worked throughout the European press for the last 65 years to state this anti-American crap that the populations have absorbed. I just had no idea that so many Britons would have swallowed this crap, hook,line and sinker!!
"The British people are made of much better stock than to kneel before a totalitarian regime that have murderous intentions."
right, an excellent argument for why the UK ought to distance herself from the US of A.
Well, well, mate! You write of the U.S. of A.as something to be distanced from. Sorry to burst your bubble, mate, however it was Sir Winston Churchill that BEGGED, BEGGED and BEGGED again that the U.S. of A. enter the war on the side of Great Britain. We were quite happy to see Europeans claw themselves to death from our side of the pond. We were bamboozled by the predecessor organisation of MI6 with the "Zimmerman telegram" which caused us to enter World War I. With the loss of many thousands of U.S. lives in the Great War, we were so reluctant to barely 20 years later enter another European war. Be VERY CAREFUL for asking for help as you did 70 years ago. You ended up with a Lend-Lease Invoice that wasn't totally paid off by the UK until 2006. We Yanks got burned during the Great War and it was money for American blood spilt in defence of Great Britain that you lot have paid for lo these many years. You have to learn from history, mate. Nothing's FREE! You pay your pound sterling for your security. You can stay an American hater however in your "Hour of Need" the U.S. gave you much of the war materiel that Great Britain used in World War II. That we charged you lot a price is the way of the world. If you resent a Yank speaking like this, please remember one thing. HOW DID THE BRITISH EMPIRE GET BUILT? Missionaries from the Church of England? No, it was British imperialists that sewed together a mass of colonies that stretched around the globe. Yet, in the last century when the German and Japanese Nations were looking to build their empires and took British colonies, don't complain to me about U.S. hubris. If you amassed a global empire and didn't have the naval and military forces to defend it, then you can't complain that we Yanks built the war materiel that brought World War II to a successful conclusion. Welcome to the world of today, jr4412. You may not want to admit it, mate, however Great Britain have done VERY WELL in the last 65 years with the "Special Relationship" that you've had with the U.S. You're MORAL SUPERIORITY of today proves to me your selective memory of the British Empire. By the way, mate, by moving away from the Special Relationship with U.S. what alternatives do you suggest for Great Britain? Alliance with Mother Russia with Vladimir Putin's kleptomaniac behaviour? A special relationship with China? You did give back Hong Kong however as it was demanded that Hong Kong be given back by the original treaty of the 19th century, then it was hard to weasel out of that one and try keeping it. Of course if you suggest that Cherry Motors build an automobile assembly works and adjacent engine works on Tyne side or Clyde side, then good luck. The Chinese propensity to move all global industry onto their shores in order to put their population to work may fly in the face of having Cherry Motors place large works within Great Britain to employ Britons. No, mate, you're stuck with the U.S. of A. It's a bad state that Great Britain have found themselves with in having a Special Relationship with the U.S. However after careful contemplation all of the other countries in the world would be SO MUCH WORSE!! It's nice to have had my say regarding this "relationship". Oh! by the way, mate of mine, jr4412, I've NEVER SEEN "BLACKHAWK DOWN." However, I did see "THE BRIDGE on THE RIVER KWAI." Come to think of it perhaps even though it was largely fictional the cooperation between British and American military forces was a source of pride to see for this Yank. May we continue in this spirit as two countries marching into the future, together.
Complain about this comment
Mark is right that we do see the British as blue-bloods. A lot of that is that we find it difficult to differentiate between accents and cannot determine class differences. Most of the time when we hear a British accent it sounds upper-class to us and right now we are quite angry with the upper-class. I read a BBC article the other day, that stated that the new head of operations for BP would have an American accent and that would help the situation. Well, it depends on the type of accent-if he sounds upper-class and privileged and then goes out on a yacht we will still hate him. Or if he calls the hard-working people of the gulf "small people" or states that all Americans want a handout-nothing will change in our view of BP.
As an American citizen I do appreciate that the UK is our friend. They sell shirts at American Eagle with a British Flag and the statement "Friends with Benefits". It took me a moment to realize they weren't talking about the usual type of benefits. But at times it seems like the people of the UK hold us in contempt and therein lies the problem. You can't remain friends with people without mutual respect.
Complain about this comment
Billy Bones #57.
wow, more than 1,400 words in reply, makes me wonder who got under whose skin. LOL
"My point was that Hitler, Tojo and Stalin all have a lot more blood on their hands than both Britain and America."
would that the same Hitler who bought the wares peddled by US Senator Prescott Bush?
on Korea: I did not write that the US fought "unilaterally" but, interestingly, they terrorised the civilian population more than anyone else:
"On 12 August 1950 the USAF dropped 625 tons of bombs on North Korea; two weeks later, the daily tonnage increased to some 800 tons.
As a result, eighteen of North Korea’s cities were more than 50% destroyed. The war's highest-ranking American POW, US Major General William Dean, reported that most of the North Korean cities and villages he saw were either ruins or snow-covered wastelands."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War#Bombing_North_Korea
"..that we have a lot of our citizens in gaol and prison is disconcerting" + "Guantanamo" + extraordinary renditions.
ironic more like, the 'land of the free' and all that.
anyway, I really can't be bothered with the remainder of your rant, life's too short.
btw, your constant use of "mate" is amusing, not to say touching (LOL), but it is rather wasted on me since I'm not a British 'subject'.
Complain about this comment
Where the non-British jr4412 is so misguided is in seeing these appalling events as somehow uniquely American. If, as I contend, America's period as top-dog stand out as less bad than that of all previous top-dogs, it seems to me that continually attacking America borders on the pathological. Taken all in all, humans are pretty awful; so why single out the US for a special generalised kicking? This is where, I think, people like dear old Senator Menendez have to take their share of the blame. By standing up with their unsustainable "Holier than thou" attitude, they provide an irresistible target for the likes of jr4412.
Complain about this comment
Mike Waller #60.
"..the non-British jr4412.."
ah yes, the measure of things. ;(
"If, as I contend, America's period as top-dog stand out as less bad than that of all previous top-dogs, it seems to me that continually attacking America borders on the pathological."
repetition is rather tedious, but here we go:
Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the various US supported coups and 'regime changes'. less bad? a matter of opinion. I think that they're mostly better at handling their PR, propaganda and outright misinformation.
as to bordering "on the pathological", I sincerely hope not, I'd be equally happy to pick bones over UK (foreign) policy (since the UK/US relationship is the topic of this blog), or more generally, discuss the failings of the nation state or the problems we face because of trans-national corporations.
"Taken all in all, humans are pretty awful.."
phew, finally, we can agree on something. ;)
"..so why single out the US for a special generalised kicking?"
(a) response to OP, (b) topical, (c) because coming over as all 'high and mighty' ("Holier than thou" attitude) does set you up for being scrutinised more closely.
frankly, much of the pro-American chorus sounds not a little racist to me, perhaps that explains why I'm happy to provide counter-arguments.
Complain about this comment
I am amazed that jr4412 lacks the insight to see that his relentless steams of bile are completely counter-productive. They may hit the spot with fellow anti-Americans; but those on the receiving end will simply dismiss what they will see as the out-pourings of an obsessive. No one individual (or message board) is likely to have any significant effect on something so big as "America"; but well aimed shots aimed at what is happening in the here and now give the best prospects of modest success.
Complain about this comment
Mike Waller #62.
"..lacks the insight to see that his relentless steams of bile are completely counter-productive."
so far you've offered your opinion and a couple of 'clever' digs, but no data, no links, nothing of substance.
bravo !
Complain about this comment
Senator Robert Menendez has just announced that as part of the ungoing Lockerbie bomber enquiry he would like to send some indiviuals over to 'Great Britain and Scotland' to interview potential witnesses.
If our 'special' relationship was so strong you would expect a US Senator to at least know the difference between Great Britain, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
It never ceases to amaze me just how ignorant our US 'friends' can be on the subject of world geography. England is so often used to describe Great Britain, and goodness knows what they think the UK is!
Complain about this comment
I sincerely hope that Menendez is trying to ease himself out of a self-dug hole.
Complain about this comment
If the relationship between our countries is as shallow as many commentors seem to think, it's a shame, and both populations deserve the blame. At the most basic level, in my American opinion, it is language that ties us. Language transmits culture, and interaction generally. Americans have access because of language to English-language culural artefacts and products from the UK (not to equate Britain with England, or to place English as the sole tongue of Britain). Without that, there would not be much of an exchange. Had the Beatles spoken not English but Italian or Japanese, they would never have amounted to much, Stateside.
I think on both sides we ought to have more regard for our natural allies and linguistic relatives - especially since so many on both sides of the pond seem so reluctant to embrace other languages!
If the UK were attacked this instant, America would not hesitate for a moment to jump in on her side - whether she were justified or not.
And it's not all bad stereotypes we have of Brits - there's also a lot of respect for what we perceive as forbearance and stoicism, as well as impeccable grammar.
In any case, we would do well to strengthen and maintain our bonds. It is truly disappointing to see that so many here do not value whatever bond we have.
Complain about this comment
wm paterson #66.
"Language transmits culture, and interaction generally ... so many on both sides of the pond seem so reluctant to embrace other languages!"
could this explain (in part) why the 'rest of the world' is getting such a raw deal?
Complain about this comment
Billy Bones @ 57
Why do you say 'mate' all the time?
Complain about this comment
Tha Americans I'm afraid to say don't think or act like the rest of us and should be viewed with caution. They didnt go to the Moon they came from the Moon.
Complain about this comment
The special relationship has probably been more economic in recent years as both the USA and UK have similar 'anglo-saxon' business models in operation ... borrowing/lending, investment, growth etc ... the kind of economics that has crashed our economies with wayward banking systems.
Britain is now 'trapped inside the EU' and is being forced to be subjugated to the 'East'.
Our special relationship ... is fading and will likely become very weak to what is has been; as Britain struggles to re-balance itself as the new 'nowhere land' that will be completely be over-run with immigration within 20 years and will likely be a completely different country to what is has been in the past ... as the 'new north west frontier' to the Indian sub-continent.
The USA will also change massively in the next 20 years ... the anglo saxon economic models have failed and massive social and economic changes are coming to both of the USA and UK.
Complain about this comment
I would not challenge Nautonier's analysis that the UK and the US are now on very different trajectories, with the UK being drawn to the East and the US heading towards latinisation. However, in terms of the here and now, I think it should be said that at the personal level, Brits usually get on very well with individual Americans, this not least because the more honest of us know that we owe the US a huge dept for its efforts in both World Wars and the Cold War. Certainly there is none of the deep-seated animosity that colours our relationship with some of our immediate neighbours. The problems arise with the American equivalent of what the IRA refer to as "the British State". In respect of the IRA, this never stopped them slaughtering hundreds of British civilians; it is, however, a useful distinction. What is so annoying to outsiders about the American State is the continual contradiction between the claimed status as "the shining city of the hill" and the day to day direction of international affairs. On the one hand there is a seemingly unshakable belief in the moral rectitude of "the American Way", and on the other its "nice guys come last" and "do whatever it takes". The British Empire was not better, always banging on about the Mother of Parliaments, Magna Carta, the Glorious Revolution etc.etc. whilst,at the same time, doing whatever it took to hold 100s of millions of non-Europeans in thrall; and, beyond its borders, regardless of the merits of the case, using its military power to enforce Britain's trade interests. O.K. if you were in on the deal, but to everybody else, it stunk of "British Hypocrisy". And this has now been replaced by "American Hypocrisy" which, in the fullness of time, will probably be overtaken by "Chinese Hypocrisy". If you want reasonably current examples of AH, think of dear old GWB and the steel tariffs. After years of banging on about free trade and railing against small countries doing tiny things to ameliorate its harsher effects, GWB found himself in political trouble because the bloated US steel industry had failed to maintain its competitive edge. Solution? Bang on some tariffs! On the political front, what caused huge anger here for years was the refuge given to IRA killers - I always think of the one who shot the unarmed PC Tibbs in the face - on the grounds that their's were political not criminal acts. Then, when 9/11 yielded US deaths just about on a scale comparable to British deaths during the course of the most recent "troubles", the whole argument was turned on its head, and terrorism per se became unforgivable. It all makes perfect sense in terms of US internal politics, but it is unfair to expect outsiders to be entirely relaxed about it. So too with the performance of dear old Senator Menendez. To outsider, Lockerbie is thought to have been the culmination of a sequence in which some jumpy sailors on the US Vincennes shot down an Iranian Airliner by mistake. Had the US immediately apologised and then court-martialed the sailors as it should have done, the whole matter might have ended there. Instead, some unspeakable fools in Congress arranged for the crew of the Vincennes to be given medals! This infuriated the Ayatollahs, who have never been very strong on understanding and forgiveness. Rather than take the US head on, the result of which would have been massive destruction of their infrastructue, they found a subcontractor to do their work for them. This, it is widely thought, is where Lybia came in. When, post Lockerbie, the matter was investigated, it was seen to be highly impolitic to put Iran in the frame as they were being quite helpful over Iraq. Instead, Libya was given a mauling. Then, many years later, the Scottish Ministers concerned, seemingly out of a humane wish not to see a cancer-sufferer die in their jail, let him return home. Learning of this, and fully cognisant of the fact that that many of the families directly affected live within their constituencies, up pop Menendez and his colleagues raising merry Cain, as if the waters, rather than being as murky as outlined above, were of crystal purity. No doubt it goes down well in much of the US; but to those lying outside the magic circle, it is just another example of "American Hypocrisy". Sorry.
Complain about this comment
The "special relationship" as articulated by Churchill in his Fulton, Missouri speech The Sinews of Peace, meant not merely "friendship and mutual understanding" but formal agreements between the Commonwealth countries and the United States for their mutual security. The "authenticity" of the relationship today continues to be found in the mutual security agreements between our governments, not in the entertainment industry.
Complain about this comment
57. At 7:16pm on 29 Jul 2010, Billy Bones wrote:
My my - what a history lesson that was.
Billy, are you pleased to have gotten all that off your chest? :)
Please, and can I say this to all 'Yanks' out there, and for the benefit of some who just like to jump on the 'bashing' band-wagon, I don't think there are many people from the UK who have either travelled to, or met someone from, the US, think of you guys in the way purported in the conversation between Billy Bones and jr4412. I don't, for one, and although we may all be guilty of critical remarks regarding the US, those remarks, in general, are aimed at US Foreign Policy, as reported in news media. Further, we Brits are equally capable of making the same, possibly derogatory, remarks about our own 'back-yard' so please, both Brits and Americans, please don't take it personally.
The 'special relationship' topic is always a heated one. In simple terms, it's a political relationship. We don't need special relationships for people, do we? Arguably, we don't need political ones either, not in the sense of a US / UK relationship - we have the UN, the EU, Save the Children!!!
I'm a Brit, but I always love visiting the US. My ex-boss is American (Wisconsin) and in my line of work, I deal with the US a lot on a business level, and can say that in general, they are courteous and professional. Compare that with the UK, sometimes, when greeted in terms like 'yeah' or 'what' when entering a shop, for instance.
Don't smack the yanks guys - we have a good relationship with them, person to person. It's their foreign policy that has been contentious in the past, but then, take a look in the mirror - so has ours. The operative in that sentence is 'past'. The question posed by Mark was meant to be looking to the future.
On a final note, I'm ex military and have worked with the USAF in my past. Professionals to the extreme, and so are we. What do we have in common? You'll have to work that one out yourself.
Complain about this comment
As an American who has spent his entire career of almost 40 years promoting Britain and British travel to Americans, I observe the following.
It's hardly surprising that Americans feel the "special relationship" between the US and Britain more than do Brits - especially over the last couple of decades as the WWII generation has been passing. But Americans don't see that "special relationship" as a geopolitical one. Rather, they see our geopolitical alliances as a result of the relationship.
For Americans, whether they consciously acknowledge it or not, Great Britain is still the "Mother Country" to our culture. Certainly, language alone is a huge bond in terms of how we see and interpret the world. Beyond that, though, we grow up schooled that Magna Carta is a document of our own political lineage, that our political system is derived from Britain - trial by jury, habeas corpus, representative democracy and so much more - from Locke and Paine and John Stuart Mill.
We grow up reading Shakespeare and Dickens, Wordsworth and Tennyson, King Arthur and Robin Hood; we go to churches - Episcopal and Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist and Quaker - that have their roots and their history in Britain; many of our most revered institutions have British origins as well - the Boy Scouts, Salvation Army and YMCA, for instance. There are more G&S societies in the US than in Britain; and our traditional graduation march is Elgar's "Land of Hope and Glory." Okay, we know it as "Pomp and Circumstance."
When Americans come to Britain, as we do by the millions, we come to see the history; we come to be awed by the castles, cathedrals, gardens, stately homes and museums, the literary sites and extraordinary landscapes. We come to go down the pub, eat fish & chips and visit with the Brits. We certainly don't come to queue at MacDonalds and visit Alton Towers.
When Brits come to America, generally they come to visit theme parks and lie on the beach, or to New York City. But any of those who HAVE ventured into the American equivalent of Middle England find a warmth and hospitality that Brits don't receive anywhere else in the world.
Forget the ups and downs of government relations; that's never been what it's about for us. But it's not hard to understand why Americans feel that "special relationship" more. And that's apt to survive, like it or not.
Complain about this comment
74. At 7:35pm on 03 Aug 2010, dhuntley100 wrote:
..."When Brits come to America, generally they come to visit theme parks and lie on the beach, or to New York City. But any of those who HAVE ventured into the American equivalent of Middle England find a warmth and hospitality that Brits don't receive anywhere else in the world"...
Agreed, and that is why on my first ever visit to the US, I ended up in NYC. Nothing had been planned, and it was purely by accident that NYC was my destination, but I decided to go with it, and enjoy my first ever US experience. I had about two weeks before I needed to be back in the UK.
What to do? First, I wanted to taste the New York lifestyle that I was familiar with from TV. I found nothing like it, but something much better. Living in London, as I did then, I made many parallels between the two, but found it such an exciting as well as charming place, that I've promoted it as a place to visit for many years, since long before the ill-fated 9/11.
To take up your point, though, I stayed in NYC for only 5 days, then rented a car and drove all the way down I-95 to MIA, stopping off in numerous places along the way. No big cities, apart from DC, but then smaller places, motels and quirky little 'back-water' towns and I found each place to be so different from the last, and the people so accommodating. Every time I spoke, I was asked where I was from, to speak some more, to tell people about things they were interested in from my home. I found it all such an adventure. One place I stopped in was a small town called 'Stoney Creek', right out of the Dukes of Hazzard. Fantastic.
Contrast that with more recent trips I've made to LA, and there's no comparison. Big cities are big cities, but to feel the real country, no matter which country you're in, you have to travel off the beaten track.
In that regard, I think the relationship between the UK and the US is strong and always greeted with interest on a personal level. That's why I think we don't need to be told we have such a 'special relationship' because ask anyone who has travelled around the US, away from the big cities, and they'll know we already have one.
Politicians, however, are always in need of some self-confidence trickery, I guess.
Complain about this comment
Well i am from the u.s and have much respect for the u.k And i also remember all the support we got after 911 from britain.And by the way thanks for led zeppelin and pink floyd great bands.
Complain about this comment
Yes they do. US, UK, Israel makes a special relationship. Many thinks its US and UK but it isn't.
It is United States of Israel and United Kingdom.
Even when pM was talking for Turkey and against Israel it was set up.
PM was giving support to Erdogan of Turkey to stand up to the military and control them FOR the benefit of Israel with the backing of US and ensuring to change the geography of Turkey. They fell for the PM's promting. It was matter of good cop and bad cop. So yes US & UK have special relationship specially when it comes to screwing other countries they can fool the best of them.
Complain about this comment
benevolentbroadmind #77.
"US, UK, Israel makes a special relationship ... when it comes to screwing other countries they can fool the best of them."
interesting point -- three flags, one swine!?
Complain about this comment
Mark, The United States is a nation obsessed with special interests, not special relationships.
If our permanent seat on the UN Security Council, or voice in Europe is needed, or dare I say our participation in a conflict to lend it some legitimacy, then we will be made to feel special.
It's a bit like being 'salesman of the month' here in the US. "You're the man, high five, have some tickets to the game, look at this guy fellahs, isn't he something special"? See how special you feel next month when you are third and get hammered for taking your one day off.
Get over it and build a better united states of Europe, y'all are gonna be welcome at the cook out then.
Complain about this comment
No matter what the political climate is between the UK and the US. The vast majority of Americans will always consider themselves allies to England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Canada and Australia, without having to think about it. I have been a Soldier for 26 years and I have never ever worried whether or not the UK would be with us one way or another in any situation I have been in. I have absolute faith in England and her Soldiers any time they are on our flanks. I and all the members of my family have always considered it our duty to support the UK in return. In fact my Grandfathers only regret is that it took us way to long before we came to England’s aid in the Second World War. As for our silly quirks and strange habits I can only plead guilty as charged! The same with our ridiculous media that’s lacks any since of what is appropriate or truly important. But for what its worth, don’t worry… we will be right here any time you need us.
Complain about this comment
I have been thinking about special relationships wrt the UK. The UK has special internal relationships between the various countries of the UK, and it has special relationships with three world groupings: (i) the Old, White World (UK/US/Canada/Australia); the EU (old/new); the non-caucasian Commonwealth (S.A./Zimbabwe/etc./India/Pakistan/Bangladesh). there are many scatterings of association outside these groupings but none assume a special relationship of world significance.
It seems to me that there has to be a choice of association between the three, because the dilution of relationship caused by trying to work all three reduces the relationship for the UK to insignificance. What remains is three 'wishful thinkings': (i) that the British diaspora of white nations can and should 'pull together'for mutual benefit. (ii) that the UK was at the heart of Europe rather than a set of offshore islands. (iii) that the black/brown african/asian nations would return to an imperialist understanding of the world and accept the flows of goods from them to the 'motherland'.
The power imbalance amongst the White West is so great that special relationships are too one-sided, and the US has needs to establish special relationships with developing powers such as Brazil and power-block leaders such as Germany.
The nature of the EU is such that there is only one special relationship - Germany and France; this goes back many years.
The special relationship known as the Commonwealth has become simply a one-way flow of peoples to England's over-populated island. Beyond this it is simply an irregular cultural jamboree of drums and dance, with the occasional athletics event.
Remembering back to '1981' (& Brave New World), the UK evolved into the 'European' offshore partner of the USA, arrayed against the European power-bloc. The USA will have to go a long way further down the path of isolation before the 1981 option becomes viable.
In the meantime, the EU is the only sensible game in town - with one proviso: free movement of individuals will need to become a negotiation rather than a right.
Complain about this comment
Mike Waller wrote @ 71:
"I would not challenge Nautonier's analysis that the UK and the US are now on very different trajectories, with the UK being drawn to the East and the US heading towards latinisation. However, in terms of the here and now, I think it should be said that at the personal level, Brits usually get on very well with individual Americans, this not least because the more honest of us know that we owe the US a huge dept for its efforts in both World Wars and the Cold War. Certainly there is none of the deep-seated animosity that colours our relationship with some of our immediate neighbours.
The problems arise with the American equivalent of what the IRA refer to as "the British State". In respect of the IRA, this never stopped them slaughtering hundreds of British civilians; it is, however, a useful distinction. What is so annoying to outsiders about the American State is the continual contradiction between the claimed status as "the shining city of the hill" and the day to day direction of international affairs. On the one hand there is a seemingly unshakable belief in the moral rectitude of "the American Way", and on the other its "nice guys come last" and "do whatever it takes".
The British Empire was not better, always banging on about the Mother of Parliaments, Magna Carta, the Glorious Revolution (?) etc.etc. whilst, at the same time, doing whatever it took to hold 100s of millions of non-Europeans in thrall; and, beyond its borders, regardless of the merits of the case, using its military power to enforce Britain's trade interests. O.K. if you were in on the deal, but to everybody else, it stunk of "British Hypocrisy".
And this has now been replaced by "American Hypocrisy" which, in the fullness of time, will probably be overtaken by "Chinese Hypocrisy".
If you want reasonably current examples of American Hypocracy, think of dear old GWB and the steel tariffs. After years of banging on about free trade and railing against small countries doing tiny things to ameliorate its harsher effects, GWB found himself in political trouble because the bloated US steel industry had failed to maintain its competitive edge. Solution? Bang on some tariffs!
On the political front, what caused huge anger for years here in the UK was the refuge given to IRA killers - I always think of the one who shot the unarmed PC Tibbs in the face - on the grounds that their's were political not criminal acts.
Then, when 9/11 yielded US deaths just about on a scale comparable to British deaths during the course of the most recent "troubles", the whole argument was turned on its head, and terrorism per se became unforgivable.
It all makes perfect sense in terms of US internal politics, but it is unfair to expect outsiders to be entirely relaxed about it. So too with the performance of dear old Senator Menendez.
To outsider, Lockerbie is thought to have been the culmination of a sequence in which some jumpy sailors on the US Vincennes shot down an Iranian Airliner by mistake. Had the US immediately apologised and then court-martialed the sailors as it should have done, the whole matter might have ended there. Instead, some unspeakable fools in Congress arranged for the crew of the Vincennes to be given medals! This infuriated the Ayatollahs, who have never been very strong on understanding and forgiveness. Rather than take the US head on, the result of which would have been massive destruction of their infrastructue, they found a subcontractor to do their work for them.
This, it is widely thought, is where Lybia came in. When, post-Lockerbie, the matter was investigated, it was seen to be highly impolitic to put Iran in the frame as they were being quite helpful over Iraq. Instead, Libya was given a mauling. Then, many years later, the Scottish Ministers concerned, seemingly out of a humane wish not to see a cancer-sufferer die in their jail, let him return home.
Learning of this, and fully cognisant of the fact that that many of the families directly affected live within their constituencies, up pop Menendez and his colleagues raising merry Cain, as if the waters, rather than being as murky as outlined above, were of crystal purity. No doubt it goes down well in much of the US; but to those lying outside the magic circle, it is just another example of "American Hypocrisy". Sorry."
.........................
I am impressed with this argument and the overall clarity of its presentation.
Is there an American among us that is willing argue an alternative scenario to refute this analysis?
.
Complain about this comment
Didn't Cameron just apologize to the citizens of Derry for butchering fourteen of their people? Isn't Rule Britannia steeped in blood down through history from the killing fields of Australia to the cities of India? And then there's the black slave trade. Need we go on? Nobody forgives terrorism more readily as the perpetrators not that it matters a damn who forgives what. Getting the sods to stop should be the singular concern of us all. Liberalism as the philosophy the declares we can do to others what we damnwell like, whenever we like, however we like, that forms the basis of that "special relationship" between the Brits and the Yanks is the disease that is killing us all.
Complain about this comment
The "special relationship" between the US and UK is a fantasy America's government allows the British government and people to indulge in as it is usually harmless enough. It isn't true now and never really was. For example, before WWII, the sentiment of the American people was 80% against getting involved in the war in Europe even though it was going badly for Britain. Even the visit to the US of the British Royal Family a year or two prior to America's entry had no effect on American public opinion.
To whatever degree there is commonality of interest or partnership between the US and UK, it is clear that the UK is the junior partner in every regard.
Politicians and others can try to paper over the differences between the two peoples and cultures but the reality is that they are vast and irreconcilable.
The recent incident regarding the release of the mass murderer Megrahi demonstrates that beneath the words, the UK places little value on its relationship with America, either that or it has badly misjudged the degree to which it can abuse whatever relationship exists. One day it will play the game once too often. Only then in the aftermath will it understand that the relationship like that of all nations with other nations has its limits which can be strained beyond breaking.
Complain about this comment
MarcusII, (see Mike Waller @ my 82)
.
I was not aware that the USA navy shot down an Iran passenger jet first; then the Iranians responded by getting a Libyan national to do the same to a jet carrying Americans (etc).
.
Did you know that the Americans kicked off this series of killings?
.
Did the USA military or any President of the USA ever say sorry for this accident (or act of war), and potentiating the response?
.
It seems that the Senator Menendez doesn't have a leg to stand on if either
(i) the Americans never apologised for the accidental shooting down this domestic Iranian flight, or
(ii) if this was a considered Act of War, the precipitative killing innocent Iranian domestic airline passengers first.
.
Complain about this comment
More on our special relationship. We need to figure out how to share the following:
UK: Much better beer, bearable summers, nicer small cars, walkable towns, Malt Whiskey, tea worth drinking.
US: Chili con carne, Small-batch & Single-barrel Bourbons, Baseball (the thinker's sport), Rocky Mountains, muscle cars, barbeque, enough ice to make water cold in hot weather.
By God it can be done. History will judge us.
PS: will you take all of our Republicans in the trade?
Complain about this comment
I have a "special relationship" with friends, but the "special-ness" of the relationship depends on the relationship with the friend, and is individual. Likewise the "special relationship" of nation states.
Friends, like countries, fall out and/or make up at times. Today's friend may become tomorrow's enemy, and vice versa. There are as many varied good and bad reasons for friendship as there are for hostility, sometimes the details are important, sometimes not.
In general, man is a social animal predisposed to individual, mutually beneficial friendships. Sometimes man seeks advantage in hostility. While regrettable individually, in the nuclear era it is potentially disastrous collectively.
Complain about this comment
Billy Bones - I'm kinda on your side, but suggesting that Brits or the French are responsible for the Holocaust and WWII (presumably because we're part of the mythical country of U-rope) is not helping your cause one little bit.
Crazy Yank - Yes, we will take your Cheneys, your Bushes and your Roves. But only if we get to drop 'em off half way...!
Complain about this comment
The " special relationship" with America is one sided and has been since world war 1.
America has alway persued it own selfish needs at the expense of all other countries ! Look at World war 2, 50 mothballed ex world war 1 destroyers( most of which either did not work or needed extensuve work to work) in return for open ended leases on british territories around the world. Not bad for our "friends". Blair was Bush's dupe, he allowed Bush to be able to say Iraq was a joint operation, payment was the bodies of our servicemen, dito Afganistan !
Treat them with the same regard as someone trying to sell you a £6 note !
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS