Britain vs the USA which is best?

[The Constitutional Republic of Freedonia]

You are saying the place where you can get charged for waving a kitchen knife against a burglar, or have a veteran arrested and jailed for turning a firearm into the police after finding it, where the government can shut down the newspapers whenever it feels like it, and where you can actually get arrested for teaching your dog a dumb trick has more freedom?

Britain has vastly less freedom in bearing arms, and substantially less in freedom of the press, and freedom of speech-not too great in religious liberties either. How do they have more freedom than America?

Right to bear arms is bullshit (admittedly it would be very difficult to implement in America, but still...). Why exactly do you need a gun in a country that normal policemen can't even carry guns. Dunblane, look it up- the reason that Britain is more sensible than the US.

Cumbria shootings, look it up-gunman was running free for hours because no one could stop him. (There was another, better, one, that I cannot recall at the moment).Why would I need a gun? Why do you need free speech? I hunt, perhaps, perhaps I want to be prepared in time of war-perhaps I think it looks cool or want to impress girls-the point is that Britain restricts that freedom, and America does not nearly as much. I can here note Britain's extreme high violent crime rate regardless of the firearm ban-but that is too off-topic.

Britain may be more "sensible"-but that is not the point here-you said that clearly were far more free, now you are switching to "sensible"-which is effectively conceding the point.

Um excuse me? When did we get arrested for teaching dogs tricks, or handing in firearms.
And where did you get the ridiculous notion that the government can shut down all the newspapers? If they could they would have during the last scandal.

Ahem.
Teaching dog trick.
Arrested for handing in gun.
Shutting down press.

Much obliged-my thanks. Saved me some time.

Yep.

No he was arrested for being anti-Semitic, the police weren't thinking,"oh we were going to release you but you trained your dog so bad luck".

Being arrested for having a certain opinion is pretty much the definition of restricting freedom of speech.

Ahem.
Teaching dog trick.
Arrested for handing in gun.
Shutting down press.

First link-I have already answered
Second link- Rule of British media, don't trust the daily mail
Third link- Britain has the same level of press freedom, check the link if you want. The accusation that we do not have a free press because it is not in our constitution is ridicolous, BECAUSE BRITAIN HAS AN UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION. It cannot be in the constitution because there is no constitution.

Britain has shut down the media, on large and small scales, Near v. Minnesota says the U.S. absolutely cannot do that (ironically, it was anti-semitism)

Just saying "Do not trust the Daily Mail" is not enough-this was a well-publicized incident with a major public response.

For the first link-saying that he was arrested for anti-semitism is, as noted, admitting that Britian has far less rights to free speech than America, who will not only not arrest antisemites, but let them parade through Jewish neighborhoods, and even demonstrate in front of the White House (while Britain keeps its government nicely locked up)

[Lamadia III]

Sorry lads- there is no argument, America basicly wouldn't be there if it wasn't for Britain. America isn't acctually a full democracy whilst Britain is and pretty much everything in America is fake and commercialised, in other words its a shithole.

What a ridiculous statement.
Britain is far more similar to countries such as the United States culturally, politically, economically (or should be), than our neighbours in France or Italy. Likewise, the idea of a 'true democracy' is really just a myth- there is no such thing as a true democracy without the threat of anarchy, and therefore I believe both the UK & US have attained maximum democratic potential as we are.
I visit the U.S at least sixteen times a year, my parents much, much more. It is a brilliant country, with a brilliant people & a brilliant culture. Evidently you haven't been down the streets of New York, or Miami, or Atlanta, or Dallas!
Have you ever been there?

[Benxboro]

America is best because I live in it.

The USA, because in Britain you get a fine for hurting someone's feelings.

It's the land of propriety, old chap.

[Maurepas]

How do I vote Britain (US Citizen) ?

[The East Marches]

How is this a pro.

Like, they charge $500 for some plastic figures.

Bad business policies. They still make enjoyable tabletop games.

I just get tired of the rule changes. I got in when the meta was OP Chimeras and Leman Russes. 6th Edition raped me. I'm trying to get back in now that 7th has come out. Maybe I'll get to enjoy the game before they fuck me again.

[Risottia]

Britain is far more similar to countries such as the United States culturally, politically, economically (or should be), than our neighbours in France or Italy.

This!
I loved how the British Senate, featuring exclusively two elected Senators per country, recently upheld the Constitution of the United Kingdom against the will of the elected Head of State who is also the head of the executive and kept a clear-cut separation between Church and State. Also it's a good thing that the UK isn't bound by silly human-rights stuff like the ECHR, that's how Britons get to carry around as many firearms as they want while not having to pay for public healthcare!

[The East Marches]

Britain is far more similar to countries such as the United States culturally, politically, economically (or should be), than our neighbours in France or Italy.

This!
I loved how the British Senate, featuring exclusively two elected Senators per country, recently upheld the Constitution of the United Kingdom against the will of the elected Head of State who is also the head of the executive and kept a clear-cut separation between Church and State. Also it's a good thing that the UK isn't bound by silly human-rights stuff like the ECHR, that's how Britons get to carry around as many firearms as they want while not having to pay for public healthcare!

Our legal systems have the same basis. We speak the same language and have other cultural similarities in our views towards society. There is a reason we are taught British history as our own up until independence.

[Galactic Assembly of Free Planets]

Britain is far more similar to countries such as the United States culturally, politically, economically (or should be), than our neighbours in France or Italy.

This!
I loved how the British Senate, featuring exclusively two elected Senators per country, recently upheld the Constitution of the United Kingdom against the will of the elected Head of State who is also the head of the executive and kept a clear-cut separation between Church and State. Also it's a good thing that the UK isn't bound by silly human-rights stuff like the ECHR, that's how Britons get to carry around as many firearms as they want while not having to pay for public healthcare!

Pretty sure she didn't mean that similar.
But looking closely, Continental and Anglophone democracy are different: one is the transference of military conquest to the ballot box, and the other is a consensus system. Broadly speaking, that is.

[United Territories and States]

We won the American Revolution and stopped the Commies.

America:1
Britiain:0

[A Humanist Science]

Britain [or] the USA...?

France.

**places colander on head and dives for cover**

[Frank Zipper]

It is the American word for jelly, though who knows why you would put it in a salad. But then who would order sausage and jam?

No, it isn't. It's a jiggly gelatin dessert that tastes vaguely like fruit flavors.

That is jelly in the UK.

[Risottia]

Our legal systems have the same basis.

Yes, I totally see how Britain has its legal system founded on a Constitution written under the main influence of the Enlightenment values.

We speak the same language

...

...

That was quite a lovely joke.

and have other cultural similarities in our views towards society.

Sure. Look at how important the American aristocracy still is; three out of four US States have a co-official Gaelic language supported also by national-service broadcasts; the PotUS also leads the Church of America; and American constables are notorious for walking around without firearms, keeping football hooligans at bay, until it's teatime and they rush to the pub which of course closes at 11pm.

There is a reason we are taught British history as our own up until independence.

Yes, having been a colony of Britain and having chosen to skip over any other previous local culture or any other immigrant culture (like, dunno, German culture?).

[Radiatia]

Tie.

In terms of history, politics and standard of living, Britain.

In terms of people, climate and whether or not I'd actually be willing to live there, USA.

Also Britain loses points for being in the European Union.

[The East Marches]

Our legal systems have the same basis.

Yes, I totally see how Britain has its legal system founded on a Constitution written under the main influence of the Enlightenment values.

We speak the same language

...

...

That was quite a lovely joke.

and have other cultural similarities in our views towards society.

Sure. Look at how important the American aristocracy still is; three out of four US States have a co-official Gaelic language supported also by national-service broadcasts; the PotUS also leads the Church of America; and American constables are notorious for walking around without firearms, keeping football hooligans at bay, until it's teatime and they rush to the pub which of course closes at 11pm.

There is a reason we are taught British history as our own up until independence.

Yes, having been a colony of Britain and having chosen to skip over any other previous local culture or any other immigrant culture (like, dunno, German culture?).

Britain is still influenced by those enlightenment values. Classical liberal thought has been the general rule of thumb for both countries. Britain's centralization only came of need of wartime and the lingering after-effects of the monarchy.

Look Italian, you can't fool me. Thats like saying the Latin speaking world has no relation to each other. All of Great Britain's former colonies share a similar thread of thinking and way of life. There is a reason why we were included in Churchill's history of the English speaking peoples.

The normal American history classes don't cover mainland Europe nor do they cover German culture. They certainly don't cover things related to the Native Americans. Least not when I was in school.

Pic related is the Anglosphere:

You could very easily make the aristocracy argument in some regards to America society as well.

[Alvecia]

*sigh*
I'm a Brit, Britain is the best, whooooooooooo
*waves tiny flag*

Tbh I've never really been interested in these kinds of dick measuring contests. Particularly given that the measuring tape is mostly subjective.

[Herargon]

We won the American Revolution and stopped the Commies.

America:1
Britiain:0

And who made the Allies win WWII? Eexactly, the 'Commies', as you put it so nicely.

[Risottia]

Britain is still influenced by those enlightenment values.

Which are mostly French with a touch of German and Italian.

Britain's centralization only came of need of wartime and the lingering after-effects of the monarchy.

After-effects of something that still exists. Uhm. Also, devolution started in Britain only 300 years after the Acts of Union.

Look Italian, you can't fool me

I would never try fooling those who already fool themselves, American.

Thats like saying the Latin speaking world has no relation to each other.

No, that's like saying that the relation between, let's say, Brazil and Portugal is less close than the one between Porrugal and Spain.
But if you prefer to fool yourself with your own strawmen, American, be your own guest.

All of Great Britain's former colonies share a similar thread of thinking and way of life.

Yeah, there's no big difference between living in India, Sudan, Kenya, Pakistan, New Zealand or Belize.
Are you sure you studied British history?

There is a reason why we were included in Churchill's history of the English speaking peoples.

Because he was half-American and was committed to Altanticism as way to keep the British Empire going?
Hardly unbiased on the issue old Winnie was, hm?

The normal American history classes don't cover mainland Europe nor do they cover German culture. They certainly don't cover things related to the Native Americans. Least not when I was in school.

Exactly. Now explain how the failures of the American schools imply homogeneity with Britain.

Pic related is the Anglosphere:

Hence Québec and Mali are totally homogeneous, as they're part of the Francophonie.

You could very easily make the aristocracy argument in some regards to America society as well.

When the Count O Philadelphia will have an hereditary seat at the US Senate.

[Mad hatters in jeans]

It's so easy to level criticism at both the USA and UK that any attempt to cheer-lead one inevitably leads to egg landing on your face.

Neither.

The diplomatic answer.

*cough* NHS *cough*

Everytime I find NHS in the news something needs fixing. I've gotten the impression that NHS doesn't really work as it is supposed to work.

With the conservatives in power they want to dismantle the NHS so they're doing their best to stop it's funding anyway they can. Hence it's going through a rough time atm.

*sigh*
I'm a Brit, Britain is the best, whooooooooooo
*waves tiny flag*

Tbh I've never really been interested in these kinds of dick measuring contests. Particularly given that the measuring tape is mostly subjective.

It never ends well.

[The East Marches]

Which are mostly French with a touch of German and Italian.

Which is why the basis of American philosophical education is Hobbes, Locke, Smith and Burke. The French revolution and its "ideas" are a separate affair from us. I'll grant that Kant and Voltaire played a role but not nearly to the extent that the British ones did on our views.

Edit: Hobbes is not technically Enlightenment but still mandatory reading none the less and piled in with that section of our philosophy.

After-effects of something that still exists. Uhm. Also, devolution started in Britain only 300 years after the Acts of Union.

The centeralization of power is something that effects any country once it touches it. Its Pandora's box. The idea of the "State" so to speak can be traced back to the monarchy or necessity of war. Its how Britain got the NHS for example.

I would never try fooling those who already fool themselves, American.

Its not fooling, its the truth of where our background lies. It certainly isn't in the German or French systems.

No, that's like saying that the relation between, let's say, Brazil and Portugal is less close than the one between Porrugal and Spain.

But if you prefer to fool yourself with your own strawmen, American, be your own guest.

I was referring to the emphasis on family, cultural ties, love of caudillos etc. That kind of stuff is a legacy of both Rome and the Conquistadors to a lesser degree.

Yeah, there's no big difference between living in India, Sudan, Kenya, Pakistan, New Zealand or Belize.
Are you sure you studied British history?

We studied it until our independence. Looking at the other Anglo countries like New Zealand, Canada, and Australia, they are very similar to Great Britain. We are the black sheep of the family because our emphasis on the individual versus society.

Because he was half-American and was committed to Altanticism as way to keep the British Empire going?
Hardly unbiased on the issue old Winnie was, hm?

He had an understanding of the patterns of history. We forced the British dismantle certain things that made their Empire possible. If anything he should harbor much resentment towards the U.S.

Exactly. Now explain how the failures of the American schools imply homogeneity with Britain.

How is a failing to teach where you came from? We have no reason to learn those people's history or background. What purpose does it serve?

Hence Québec and Mali are totally homogeneous, as they're part of the Francophonie.

I'd easily argue that Quebec and France are very similar. Even Louisiana, the only non-Anglo state, has the backwards French style of law. Its tough to get the French to assimilate no matter what. Hence why the Acadians were expelled and sent to Louisiana. Thats only changed just recently I believe to where now their laws are back in line with the U.S. They had some very foolish ideas floating around like "Abus de droit" and other things that made me sick.

When the Count O Philadelphia will have an hereditary seat at the US Senate.

Clintons, Bushs, and Kennedys to name a few. We have one in all but name.

[Forsher]

This!
I loved how the British Senate, featuring exclusively two elected Senators per country, recently upheld the Constitution of the United Kingdom against the will of the elected Head of State who is also the head of the executive and kept a clear-cut separation between Church and State. Also it's a good thing that the UK isn't bound by silly human-rights stuff like the ECHR, that's how Britons get to carry around as many firearms as they want while not having to pay for public healthcare!

Our legal systems have the same basis. We speak the same language and have other cultural similarities in our views towards society. There is a reason we are taught British history as our own up until independence.

And there's a reason why British historians look at the US treatment of Magna Carta only to stop and think. The US does very strange things with history.

What Risottia is pointing out is that the US political system and structures are enormously different to Britain's. You want similarities? Compare and contrast Britain and New Zealand... but even then one of those countries has not got constituent countries. It doesn't have to be opposed to the other points (and nor do I think it is correct to assume that it is).

Our legal systems have the same basis.

Yes, I totally see how Britain has its legal system founded on a Constitution written under the main influence of the Enlightenment values.

I think the point is that they are common law jurisdictions (ish, iirc for some US states). I think this is a more reasonable understanding of the basis.

(I've ignored the rest of the post because it is inconvenient.)

Britain's centralization only came of need of wartime and the lingering after-effects of the monarchy.

What exactly are you talking about?

If you consider the Civil War, for instance, a large part of the issue at hand was increased centralisation and concentration of power (especially with respect to how this was distributed... e.g. favouritism and Scottish models). However, the tax system was, to be blunt, non-existent with what we might think of as tax being raised by parliament (and thus making use of parliamentary networks). When Charles decided to rule without parliament, it was thought best by, I guess, his camp to not try and introduce any new taxes. Consequently, the tax system that developed made use of some extremely old laws. Personal Rule was, therefore, doomed to fail in the face of any increased demands on the tax purse such as, say, war with Scotland (which is interesting because Charles was also king of Scotland) and I think there were some other conflicts going on at the same time [incidentally, this era has interesting parallels with Brexit]. Centralisation was highly driven by the monarchy rather than lingering after-effects (although these matter too).

Look Italian, you can't fool me. Thats like saying the Latin speaking world has no relation to each other. All of Great Britain's former colonies share a similar thread of thinking and way of life. There is a reason why we were included in Churchill's history of the English speaking peoples.

The US is more like South Africa than Australia or New Zealand. (Which ignores that those three countries play the same sports, ignore the one that Britain cares most about and none of these sports are particularly popular in the US or, I believe, in Canada either.)

(Image)

The US should be considered the much older half-brother raised by the other parent, who later adopted Canada. The 1700s were a long time ago.

Consider which of these countries lines up best with this list of appealing features...

And the US is still seen as an appealing place to live and work?

Poor social mobility. An educational system more inequitable than ours. Poor working conditions. Polarised political structure groaning under the weight of years. Sprawling urban environments (although, based on what I've seen in films and the like some cities have reasonably good public transport options). Culture of distrust of govt. Absence of privacy in public toilets. Proliferation of weapons. Where are the positives? Better than where many immigrants come from, I suppose.

(For reference, the US education system is more inequitable than NZ's... at least NZ doesn't need to exclude the poor schools to compare internationally in PISA: one assumes the flaws in international comparisons are equally present for comparisons involving both countries*.)

*This possibly isn't true: I can't actually remember why you don't trust the international comparisons made with PISA.

[Isetnonotekh]

This too vague.

[Freefall11111]

The USA, because in Britain you get a fine for hurting someone's feelings.

Explains why every person in the country has been called a cunt or a twat a dozen times over.

[Freefall11111]

stopped the Commies.

Nobody. They stopped themselves.

[Alvecia]

The USA, because in Britain you get a fine for hurting someone's feelings.

Explains why every person in the country has been called a cunt or a twat a dozen times over.

*raises hand*
I'm near two dozen

[The East Marches]

And there's a reason why British historians look at the US treatment of Magna Carta only to stop and think. The US does very strange things with history.

What Risottia is pointing out is that the US political system and structures are enormously different to Britain's. You want similarities? Compare and contrast Britain and New Zealand... but even then one of those countries has not got constituent countries. It doesn't have to be opposed to the other points (and nor do I think it is correct to assume that it is).

Funnily enough, our high court recently used the Magna Carta as even older precedent than our Constitution. It was related to grape/raisin farmers in California.

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21656206-magna-carta-helps-stop-federal-raids-raisin-crops-no-more-sour-grapes

I understand that we have differences but broadly speaking it was the British system that influenced ours. Its the same reason we have "Castle Doctrine" and other things like that. They were brought over with the original colonists who crossed over.

I think the point is that they are common law jurisdictions (ish, iirc for some US states). I think this is a more reasonable understanding of the basis.

(I've ignored the rest of the post because it is inconvenient.)

You summed it well.

What exactly are you talking about?

If you consider the Civil War, for instance, a large part of the issue at hand was increased centralisation and concentration of power (especially with respect to how this was distributed... e.g. favouritism and Scottish models). However, the tax system was, to be blunt, non-existent with what we might think of as tax being raised by parliament (and thus making use of parliamentary networks). When Charles decided to rule without parliament, it was thought best by, I guess, his camp to not try and introduce any new taxes. Consequently, the tax system that developed made use of some extremely old laws. Personal Rule was, therefore, doomed to fail in the face of any increased demands on the tax purse such as, say, war with Scotland (which is interesting because Charles was also king of Scotland) and I think there were some other conflicts going on at the same time [incidentally, this era has interesting parallels with Brexit]. Centralisation was highly driven by the monarchy rather than lingering after-effects (although these matter too).

Thats farther foward from history than I was even thinking. I was taught the British centralization came about due to 1066 and the Norman invasion. That started the cycle of a properly strong British crown. The other salient figures being Edward II and Richard II.

The US is more like South Africa than Australia or New Zealand. (Which ignores that those three countries play the same sports, ignore the one that Britain cares most about and none of these sports are particularly popular in the US or, I believe, in Canada either.)

(Image)

The US should be considered the much older half-brother raised by the other parent, who later adopted Canada. The 1700s were a long time ago.

I can go with that analogy. Being compared to South Africa is a bit of an insult tbh. We're not that bad.

(For reference, the US education system is more inequitable than NZ's... at least NZ doesn't need to exclude the poor schools to compare internationally in PISA: one assumes the flaws in international comparisons are equally present for comparisons involving both countries*.)

*This possibly isn't true: I can't actually remember why you don't trust the international comparisons made with PISA.

I think you are conflating the U.S. with the Chinese. I was reading that our school scores were unduly weighed down by poor inner city schools and we wanted to do the same. (I don't support that btw). The international PISA scores for some of the East Asia countries are cooked.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/january/test-scores-ranking-011513.html

This is from Stanford and explains things a little better than I am capable of.

Though, to address the comment on weaponization: "Muh freedums"