BBC Spends £11 Million Being a Cunt!

[DieselDaisy]

You tell him, Snake!

------

Didn't read the whole thread and sorry if it was already answered but does it count if you have more than one TV at home? Do you have to pay more?

No. One tv licence is good for the whole house.

[Guest Len B'stard]

Yeah, i thought as much

I'm proud to be white and I'm not a racist.

White pride is not black hate, BUT growing up around cocky black people who tell you that black people are stronger than white people makes me want to be the best.

(If I'm honest) In my mind I can be so racist if I want to be just because I'm that arrogant and I start going on fitness and coolness, even against my own race/white people too, but... That's only when I'm feeling cocky. - but that's not cool, no, fuck racism, that pisses me off, and so what if I'm white.

No one chose to be born but still love the skin you're in... There are a lot of social classes and politeness and happiness issues to worry about, before bringing up my race.

It's something I'm used to and is my lot in life and I'm really trying not to get wiped out. I don't care what my children are but I hate it when people are all in support of me because they want to see an end to the white race, 4 real, a friend said that to me once and that silently vexed me. He didn't mean to kill white people, but he did say he wanted to breed us out, I'm like, (In my head) thinking HOLD UP! WTF! WHAT THE HELL, I'm dealing with that ignorance, nah, life pisses me off when I'm reminded about the reality of different races and the amount of poor trampy white people too who, must let these negative things they're fed with get to them, but then the disproportionally well off white people too, and all the up and coming minorities... not to mention all the foreign money, the super rich people not from the UK living in London and gentrification and money, because when I really think about it it's the same day to day monotony that I'm usually oblivious to because I'm not happy since I can't even get the free things I want out of life.

I mean, it's random enough I live where I live as it is but I love life, so what if the people I know are brown and some of them from around the world and a lot of the white people I know are from; Portugal, France, Lithuania, Italy, Germany... I also know black people from Spain still. - so what, that's life, felt like Star Trek DS9 when I was in school, was cool

Might write a power ballad

Or a bad arse rap song

Fuck it.

No one said there was anything wrong with being white though, did they? I was just taking the piss out of the fact that, despite being white, you choose to try and talk like you're some kind of son of the Windrush generation...that is when you're not trying to talk like a yank. Y'know what that tells me, the last thing in the world you are is proud of what you are and you've learned about life off the telly

I don't care what you are or who you are and my comment wasn't supposed to the opening salvo in some kind of race debate or a request for you to begin writing your biography at me in response, i was taking the piss out of you. I don't just think it sounds stupid when white people from England talk like that, I think it's the same kinda stupid when Asian lads do, it's ridiculous, you simply do not talk like that, you can't do, you saw someone doing it, thought it sounded cool and took it, simple as that, just like watching too much fuckin' yank telly when you should be out doing something with your life makes you end up half talking like them as well.

You don't call it getting your welfare here, it's your Giro check.

What the fuck's a "check" when it's at home in English you fookin' poof?

Uh, a cock up

Edited May 18, 2014 by sugaraylen

[bacardimayne]

Oi cunt I'll hook ya in the gabba m8

[DieselDaisy]

Also, I wanna know if Brits in general, even if speaking in some weird accent, can switch to like.. foreigner friendly textbook English?

Any Englishman worth his comedic birthright can usually do near-perfect impressions of all of our regional accents as part of his pub banter, be they, posh-English, brummie, scouse, geordie, etc.

[Guest Len B'stard]

They could but they'd be putting it on and how well it does or doesn't come off is dependent on how good of an actor they are, it's like asking you if you can do an australian accent or something, I'm sure you could have a go.

To be clear here, Geordies, Scousers, all these lot, they ain't doing it on purpose, it ain't like arrogance on their part, it's their accent, it's how they talk and how everyone around them talks...now can you wilfully change that? Of course you can but anybody could do that with their manner of speech if they really apply themselves...but why would you want to sound like anything but yourself?

[Guest Len B'stard]

Nah, they shouldn't change it except in situations where someone really can't understand what the fuck you're saying. I think that's arrogant, to not even try.

So anyway, you got what, geordies, scourers etc. but who speaks the way they do in BBC News?

They do try though, I mean those don't go around giving it all that bobbins and baggins shit, they try...but at the same time if you expect them to go from how they are talking to like...i dunno, sounding like Burlington Bertie it's not gonna happen.

Who speaks the way they do in BBC News? Hmm, sort of middle class people from the south east I suppose. It's really no different or no more or less complicated than the regional variations in America, it's just that you're not as bombarded with ours as you are with theirs.

Edited May 18, 2014 by sugaraylen

[Guest Len B'stard]

Nah, they shouldn't change it except in situations where someone really can't understand what the fuck you're saying. I think that's arrogant, to not even try.

So anyway, you got what, geordies, scourers etc. but who speaks the way they do in BBC News?

They do try though, I mean those don't go around giving it all that bobbins and baggins shit, they try...but at the same time if you expect them to go from how they are talking to like...i dunno, sounding like Burlington Bertie it's not gonna happen.

Who speaks the way they do in BBC News? Hmm, sort of middle class people from the south east I suppose. It's really no different or no more or less complicated than the regional variations in America, it's just that you're not as bombarded with ours as you are with theirs.

The fucker in the subway station didn't though . I suppose you're right to an extent here. I rarely see any British movies, TV or news.. or talk to Brits. Can't say the same about America(ns). Yet I think your varitions between accents are stronger than in the US.

I think the beauty of culture is as much about whats similar between us as whats different...and both should be celebrated as such. If i go to Finland or watch a Finnish movie i don't wanna see no fuckin' English, i don't wanna walk around Helsinki and see 'Ye Olde English Pub', i know that shit, if i come to Finland i did it cuz i wanna see your people, same as with any other country, this whole idea of this one universal way or language or whatever is the death of culture and the death of culture means the death of the individual and we can't have that because the individual is the most important thing in the world.

It don't have to be separation with a view to like...superiority, it's just 'hey, this is what it's like over here, whats it like over there?'

Edited May 18, 2014 by sugaraylen

[Guest Len B'stard]

Nah, they shouldn't change it except in situations where someone really can't understand what the fuck you're saying. I think that's arrogant, to not even try.

So anyway, you got what, geordies, scourers etc. but who speaks the way they do in BBC News?

They do try though, I mean those don't go around giving it all that bobbins and baggins shit, they try...but at the same time if you expect them to go from how they are talking to like...i dunno, sounding like Burlington Bertie it's not gonna happen.

Who speaks the way they do in BBC News? Hmm, sort of middle class people from the south east I suppose. It's really no different or no more or less complicated than the regional variations in America, it's just that you're not as bombarded with ours as you are with theirs.

The fucker in the subway station didn't though . I suppose you're right to an extent here. I rarely see any British movies, TV or news.. or talk to Brits. Can't say the same about America(ns). Yet I think your varitions between accents are stronger than in the US.

I think the beauty of culture is as much about whats similar between us as whats different...and both should be celebrated as such. If i go to Finland or watch a Finnish movie i don't wanna see no fuckin' English, i don't wanna walk around Helsinki and see 'Ye Olde English Pub', i know that shit, if i come to Finland i did it cuz i wanna see your people, same as with any other country, this whole idea of this one universal way or language or whatever is the death of culture and the death of culture means the death of the individual and we can't have that because the individual is the most important thing in the world.

It don't have to be separation with a view to like...superiority, it's just 'hey, this is what it's like over here, whats it like over there?'

Yeah man, there are lots of things in every culture to embrace. Accents too. That doesn't mean it's polite to try to speak to the other individual so that they understand. If you go to Finland surely you'd appreciate if people spoke English to you instead of repeating the same shit over and over in Finnish when you really need answer to something you're asking from someone .

Death of the culture means the death of the individual though? Care to elaborate what you mean by that?

Maybe they were trying? Maybe what you heard was them trying? And what I mean by that is, a broader statement regarding culture and not necessarily in response to any position of yours. Culture is us right, it's our thing, whoever us may be. The day English is a universal language, the day every high street in every country has like a McDonalds and a Starbucks etc etc is the death of culture cuz it's the death of individuality and our individuals selves, by way of nationality or whatever is what culture is about.

There is something inherently beautiful, in a standalone sense, about America, about Finland, about England, about Germany about Sri Lanka about those things need to be expressed and moreover preserved and allowed to evolve. Why should anybody have to do shit so other folks understand, why should there be this flatline cultural median, it's bullshit, if i don't understand something about your ways or what you said alls i have to do is go 'hey, what does that mean?' and you tell me and i learn and i become a better person for it.

There's something beautiful about white people, black people, brown people, yellow people how they are and who they are and compromising that means diluting it and that bullshit is not necessary for us to get along. Not necessary at all. I understand is some instances, through cultures crossing over etc that this kind of shit overlaps but that ain't the same as being fake.

It's about what you live, not how you pretend.

Edited May 19, 2014 by sugaraylen

[Guest Len B'stard]

Why do you sound like you're arguing against something? I never said culture's a negative thing or anything like that.

And what I mean by that is, a broader statement regarding culture and not necessarily in response to any position of yours.

[Snake-Pit]

The Australians call us POMs apparently which an Australian once told me stands for Prisoner of Mother England...

The United States came to be as well because of this whole culture of tax and oppression (the United States of America formed when colonies kicked out their British representatives and declared war on Great Britain and allied with the French and won and France officially recognised The United States first and, now we have America). It seems to be a British thing; All this tax and oppression.

It's like you're stealing TV if you don't pay and so must go to prison. It's b/s.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Snake-Pit

[DieselDaisy]

It seems to be a British thing; All this tax and oppression.

Quite the reverse: concerning oppression, late eighteenth-century Britain was probably the freest country in the world. In Europe - Bourbon France and Spain, Hohenzollern Prussia, the Hapsburg Empire, Tsarist Russia (which still had serfdom!) - royal absolutism reigned supreme, whereas, in Britain, constitutional monarchy was well advanced. Britain was not a democracy yet but it had a free press; it had a degree of religious toleration (however flawed) and lacked the types of mass conscription and large standing armies which the continental powers employed (especially under Napoleon). Most important of all, Britain had a representative (albeit flawed, representative) government based upon a series of checks-and-balances, alongside a, population free from arbitrary royal coercion; no other country in Europe possessed this.

Regarding tax, you have to remember that taxation (crucially the salt tax) played an important role in fuelling the resentment against the Bourbons which eventually triggered France's Revolution in 1789. Taxation existed everywhere and was, no more, or no less oppressive in Britain.

Edited May 19, 2014 by DieselDaisy

[fred_carston]

Pay No TV Licence

https://twitter.com/theStuartHall

[DieselDaisy]

It seems to be a British thing; All this tax and oppression.

Quite the reverse: concerning oppression, late eighteenth-century Britain was probably the freest country in the world. In Europe - Bourbon France and Spain, Hohenzollern Prussia, the Hapsburg Empire, Tsarist Russia (which still had serfdom!) - royal absolutism reigned supreme, whereas, in Britain, constitutional monarchy was well advanced. Britain was not a democracy yet but it had a free press; it had a degree of religious toleration (however flawed) and lacked the types of mass conscription and large standing armies which the continental powers employed (especially under Napoleon). Most important of all, Britain had a representative (albeit flawed, representative) government based upon a series of checks-and-balances, alongside a, population free from arbitrary royal coercion; no other country in Europe possessed this.

Regarding tax, you have to remember that taxation (crucially the salt tax) played an important role in fuelling the resentment against the Bourbons which eventually triggered France's Revolution in 1789. Taxation existed everywhere and was, no more, or no less oppressive in Britain.

Wasn't slave trade around until 19th century in Britain?

Until 1807. It probably would have been legislated against sooner if the French Revolution, and subsequent Haitian slave revolt, had not intervened.

[Snake-Pit]

This thread has been Snake-Pitted

I apologise.

[DieselDaisy]

It seems to be a British thing; All this tax and oppression.

Quite the reverse: concerning oppression, late eighteenth-century Britain was probably the freest country in the world. In Europe - Bourbon France and Spain, Hohenzollern Prussia, the Hapsburg Empire, Tsarist Russia (which still had serfdom!) - royal absolutism reigned supreme, whereas, in Britain, constitutional monarchy was well advanced. Britain was not a democracy yet but it had a free press; it had a degree of religious toleration (however flawed) and lacked the types of mass conscription and large standing armies which the continental powers employed (especially under Napoleon). Most important of all, Britain had a representative (albeit flawed, representative) government based upon a series of checks-and-balances, alongside a, population free from arbitrary royal coercion; no other country in Europe possessed this.

Regarding tax, you have to remember that taxation (crucially the salt tax) played an important role in fuelling the resentment against the Bourbons which eventually triggered France's Revolution in 1789. Taxation existed everywhere and was, no more, or no less oppressive in Britain.

Wasn't slave trade around until 19th century in Britain?

Until 1807. It probably would have been legislated against sooner if the French Revolution, and subsequent Haitian slave revolt, had not intervened.

Well, I don't see how you can view late eighteenth century Britain as the freest country at the time, when there were people in chains with no human rights . I mean probably it was for the natives but not the imported slaves. Surely there were nations with freedom and without slavery at the time? Maybe even Russia had more freedom since serfdom wasn't as bad as pure slavery.

Well I actually meant 'free' as in, metropolitan government and law, not, what was happening outside Europe. It was a mere comparison between ancien régime European governments (as they were at the time), and Great Britain. The simple fact is, the United States revolted against a metropolis which possessed religious toleration (cf. the Bill of Rights, 1689), a free press, bicameral parliamentary representation and judicial process. True, some countries also boasted some of these items (e.g. Frederick II’s Prussia, a haven for religious dissenters and persecuted minorities) yet, no country had all of these things together in a form which seems to us, strikingly modern. (It is ironic, the Thirteen Colonies allying themselves with Bourbon France, a country with no Parliament - in fact, no representative body whatsoever - an arbitrary and coercive judicial system, and oppressive taxation and labour laws.)

In regards to the transatlantic slave-trade, firstly the Portuguese, then the British/Americans (I am including them together for obvious reasons), thirdly the Spanish, and then the French played the biggest role in exporting slaves - in loosely, that order. Other nations, such as the Germanic countries and Scandinavia also traded slaves but were limited by their lack of Atlantic sea outlets. So, besides Britain, that is France - then, the most powerful country in the world - the entire Iberian peninsular, and in a more limited way, others: that is practically all of Western Europe who were involved in transatlantic slavery! Also, understand that France, Spain and Portugal had empires.

Additionally, in regards to the native populous, much of ancien régime Europe had, if not serfdom (as witnessed in Eastern Europe), then the remnants of feudalism, by which, peasants were tied to the land and had labour dues and travel restrictions. Feudalism had been largely absent from England since, circa the 15^th century - that early. In contrast, it was not swept away from the continent until Napoleon.

[Snake-Pit]

I was walking in Soho and I saw a blue plaque; which indicates something interesting the other week, so I stopped and read it and saw

I was like 'wow'. - Frith Street.

I did not expect to see that. - I found the television place.

I looked around and not far from that were modern flat screens in this shop on the corner being used for CCTV I saw too.

History and oppression aside, is the UK the only country to have a scheme like this? - Pay for state TV if you can or don't pass Go and go straight to jail.

LOL - upon seeing if I liked my wording of that, I found this.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Snake-Pit

[Guest Len B'stard]

God i hate those blue plaques.

[Gracii Guns]

Is that red image of Snake's doing anything funny to anyone else's eyes too?

[Guest Len B'stard]

Gracii's first acid trip