h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Cricket? Decent international standard?

Top 5 in the world cup, and given the way the rest of the world capitulated to the Australians, we aren't that far out of touch...

At the 5 day game we are still probably the second best in the world, and that's with a makeshift bowling attack and a crock for captain. We'll wipe the floor with the Lara-less Windies.

SoRB, what I am saying is that it's subjective*. If you choose some criteria to try and gauge 'best' by they are still your criteria. Someone living somewhere else might have perfectly valid reasons to think that your criteria aren't useful or meaningful.


* and there is nothing wrong with subjective. But Blair (and Bush) should have said "I love my country because xxx" not that it is the greatest.


>>
2. Safety/security.
Safety from violence, secure employment, security of health. Again, there are countries where these needs are not met. Iraq, for instance...
<<

Yeah, and the UK, NZ, Australia, the US etc.

I think TB only said what he did because he's halfway out the door and was trying to eke out a bit of tears and pride before he slopes off. Like the runner-up in "Statesman Idol", or something.

From Roymondo's link;

"Your genuine lack of patriotism
One of the things that Britons can be most proud of is, perversely, the fact that they don't take an unseemly pride in being British."

I doubt he really believes Britain to be the greatest nation on Earth. It was a sudden lack of humility amidst a concerted effort to appear humble. Fundamentally unBritish.

"Safety from violence, secure employment, security of health. Again, there are countries where these needs are not met. Iraq, for instance...
<<

Yeah, and the UK..."

Possible misunderstanding of the meaning of Maslow's hierarchy. The idea is that if you don't have one of the low level needs met, that becomes the focus of your existence. Only when the needs of one level are met in full can you even begin to focus on the next level.

Hence, if you can't get food to eat or clean water, the question of whether you lose your job, or don't have a nice car or the respect of your peers doesn't really register.

I would suggest that the vast majority of Maslow's needs are met in most civilised countries for most people. (Of course some people choose, by membership of a street gang or by drug use for example, to put themselves in positions where their needs for security or health are compromised. They are responsible for that, though)

I live in the UK.

I feel secure from violence. Obviously, there is a minor risk of mugging or other violent crime, but it is minimal to the point that I don't think about it from one day to the next. This goes also for pretty much everyone I know.

I feel secure in employment. Obviously, there is a risk of redundancy, but it is minimal to the point that I don't think about it from one day to the next, and I'm reasonably confident I could get another job. Ditto, pretty much everyone I know.

I am reasonably healthy, and when I am not there is adequate social healthcare to ensure my return to health or management of my symptoms. I therefore don't focus all my efforts in life on achieving security of health, because I don't need to. Nor does anyone else I know.

Now, if you're telling me that in YOUR home country, the *focus* of your life is on avoiding violence, or on the insecurity of your job, or on the unreliable healthcare provision, I will severely downgrade my received impression of how civilised NZ is as a country.

But understand please that in the UK at least, these things are not the primary concern of the majority of the people here.

SoRB

No, I understand Maslow's heirarchy of needs. But I do think that things like safety from violence, or security of employment are relative.

I totally get that you feel all those things you listed, because you live a relatively priviledged life (relative to others in the UK I mean). And by the sounds of it a relatively isolated or contained life in terms of seeing how alot of people live. If you don't know anyone that has no job security or has been failed by the health system then you are living in a different country from them really How many chronically ill people do you know? How many long term unemployed? How many people who live near or below the poverty line? (and by poverty I mean can't afford to live well, not simply a low income)

It may be true that the majority of people in the UK get most of Maslow's needs met a lot of the time, but there are still significant numbers that don't.

When I think about something like employment I don't compare NZ with Iraq, I compare NZ in 2007 with NZ in 1980 or 1950 or 1850 or 1650. There are people here who don't have security of employment, and I know that is true in the UK too.


And for what it's worth I would much rather be living here than in the UK, but that is a personal preference, it's not because NZ is greater than the UK in any objective sense.

Why does Britain have to take asylum seekers who have made it to France? Because we have treaties doleing out who takes what number of refugees. France and Germany already have far larger immigrant populations than the UK.

I wouldn´t say you are the greatest nation on Earth, not anymore anyway. I´m not sure how you would define which one is the best, but I think it is obvious there are many countries a lot worse than England.
And how many countries play cricket anyway?

England has most certainly changed the course of history and its relationship with America has been very special. As far as the greatest, I think Mohamed Ali claimed that title although he was just an individual.
I certainly have enjoyed the hospitality shown to me on my several visits to Oxford and found the people I met at the taverns to be genuine. Like America, England finds itself unable to have the luxury to distence itself from world affairs and has had to take the consequences both good and for ill. To appreciate England is as complex as to understand any other nation. I found it best to do so with one individual at a time.

Great Britain stopped being great a long time ago. Dont get me wrong we're still good at a load of things but we took our eye off the ball and started looking at the prizes and lost the lot.

A bit like George Best in a way. Not content with being great we started to take more pleasure in the peripheral stuff and started to drop our standards of application.

Motor industry great marques developed here are now owned by foreign companies from countries that Great Britain used to pretty much owned by Great Britain.

Any number of measures could have turned things around but we rested on our laurels and lost out.

Wow, that really wasn´t the kind of post I expected from you in response to this Blicky.

Here's one example of how we in the UK bugger things up for ourselves.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6654923.stm
Woman killed in what appears to be a case of domestic violence. Services for vulnerable women and their children are shockingly underfunded in relation to the work that could be done demostrably needs to be done.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6654213.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/6655777.stm
The response of more than one UK researcher to similar stories can be summed up as "its not my problem" that youths with knives are killing people.



The official response to crime appears to be a an attempt to grab positive headlines by geting lots of arrests for petty crimes. Which has back fired in two ways it doesnt work for people and it hasnt worked for them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6652611.stm
Whereas the response to the dissapearance of an unfortunate little girl, undoubtably a family tragedy has been massive. I have heard no one speak to me about any of the other stories but Ive got two texts and seen lots of people talking about this one.


So navel gazing has replaced forward thinkng and useful community action.

one love

>And how many countries play cricket anyway?<

Xan - my answer was more in the area of pointing out how arbitary one's choices might be (particulalrly if one is white and middle-class) in choosing 'the greatest country in the world'. To whit, the fact that I could happily swap rugby/cricket for gridiron/baseball and a better climate and still consider myself in one of the 'greater' countries on earth...

Actually...Gordon Brown's been pretty good for beer. Tax breaks for small breweries, etc. And, yes, at its best British beer *is* the best. But I wouldn't sniff at Czech or German, either.

Maslow:
He got his hierarchy upside down, of course. If people can't self-actualise, they can't even *think* of the basics of food or shelter. Ask anyone with depression. Ask any homeless alcoholic.

As for whether or not we're the greatest nation...
I don't understand the concept. Yes, I live in Britain and I'm culturally adapted to it. So that must make me British by any measure. But does it mean that I have more in common with a random Yukanian than with a random foreigner? Not necessarily, and often only in terms of surface trivia such as language.

In any case - assuming that I *did* feel connected with all other British people...on what basis do I have the right to claim credit for their (allegedly superior) accomplishments? It's far more sensible to claim credit for who you are and what you do, not for where you live.

Tell you what, though...we're a damned parochial lot. We sneer at the Americans for their lack of world knowledge, but ever tried talking about world politics with somebody from Germany, Italy, Ireland...?

I don't drink beer or lager so that's one thing I don't need to worry about.

Though the Americans could do with educating that just because Magner's is Oirish doesn't make an especially good cider. What with that long Oirish tradition of cider brewing an all.

>>I don't drink beer or lager

That's preposterous!

, the (very) odd glass of . A (mostly margherita's) or three. That's me.

I can pretty much get anywhere, really. So brewing is not one of the things that comes into my head when considering what puts the Great in Britain.

Cider gives me heartburn and leaves a taste of vomit in my mouth. Strangely, I can only drink the really tannic, bitter kind that usually comes in unlabled industrial plastic containers and tastes faintly of cowshit.

But beer is a wonderful thing. Such complexity of flavours! At least...*good* beer is a wonderful thing. Ungood beer is dreadful.

But, yes, I do like wine. And a properly made margarita - ie not the weak, slushy kind. Or a gin martini with extra olives. Or a manhattan...

>> Ungood beer is dreadful. <<

Sadly, however, this is what the majority drinks. I believe they call it "lager".

The only other countries that compete with the UK on beer-making are Belgium & the Netherlands, IMHO.

RF

Lager isn't all bad. Some of the continental white lagers are very agreeable.

But in general, I'd go along with the beer-as-alcoholic-soup school of thinking.