Thats why we are good people.
We can agree, disagree, and debate. We all have very different upbringings and life experiences.
I love your considered reply. And agree with a great deal of it...sadly in some ways.
Godd on you D8 for stating your opinion. We have slightly different views, and I TEND to be a person who wears rose coloured lenses, and wishes big.
I hope the ceremony goes well, it is a statement to the world on all our behalves.
I feel proud to be me, not British, but I'd fight our corner if needed.
Me, i might watch it on the telly.......
Tale care D
Davey
Driver8 wrote:
@Damnfoolman
Hi Davey - I'm certainly not going to shoot you down for your opinion at all. After all, that's all anything on this forum is - nothing but people's opinions - and we're all entitled to keep our own.
However what your post has highlighted to me is the need for me to clarify a couple of things to avoid people getting the wrong idea.
Firstly, please do not think for one second that I'm in any way belittling or having a go at anyone who is under-privileged or less fortunate than others. This is not my intention at all. I was certainly not born with a silver spoon in my mouth and anything that I have achieved in life is purely down to considerable sacrifices made by my family when I was young, and my own hard work and care in the choices I've made since : I am certainly not "to the manor born". I've also done charity work in the past including both raising money and providing manual labour for charitable projects, so having a go at anyone less fortunate was not my intention here at all.
However what I AM having a bit of go at are two things -
Firstly (and this is the main thrust of my original post), I just think the idea of having the Olympic opening ceremony based around showing Britain as some kind of turn-of-the-century (the LAST century that is!) farming community just sounds a bit lame and cr*p to me. The opening ceremony is supposed to be a grand spectacle and seeing the stadium kitted out as a fake field, with real farm animals wondering about and people having picnics just doesn't sound that great to me - sorry. Additionally as far as I'm concerned, over 50% of the population don't live the green and pleasant part of Britain - they live in the cities - so I feel it's an unrealistic view of the UK. Of course I don't remotely propose we show inner city violence (I really was kidding about that in my initial post!), so I think they would've been better off steering clear of any "picture of Britain" completely and gone with just providing a great spectacle like the last two Olympics have managed so well. Lastly on this point I will say that I'll be the first to eat humble pie if the ceremony turns out to be amazing. Rest assured I'll be on here retracting this and my earlier post the day after the ceremony if it's as great as we all hope it will be! And believe me, I DO genuinely hope it will be fantastic as I love the Olympic Games both as a spectacle and as a showcase for the country, and also for the competitors and the work they've put in to get to the very top.
Secondly, my post was also having a bit of a go at the system, and what I see as the failure of the social framework at the highest level. I don't want to get political here, but I believe I have certainly seen the country change (and not for the better IMO) over the last 20 years or so. The phrase "Broken Britain" is still very much alive to my mind. I completely agree that there are a lot of areas in the UK that are still green and pleasant - yep, the generally expensive parts - but as with any country on Earth there are also a large number of areas that aren't either green or pleasant, with social degradation rife, and IMO this is a failing of the system. Like you, I've seen similar situations in other countries, but the UK is historically supposed to be one of the most advanced countries on Earth and yet the system still regularly fails a huge swathe of society. Yes there are a large number of private individuals and organisations doing extraordinary things to improve the situation for millions, but the fact these are needed at all is indicative of consistent failings at the highest level of the system. Take for example the situation I read about recently whereby it works out better for some people to keep having more and more children and remain unemployed as they get more money in benefits than they would if they worked. Who's to blame - the people claiming the benefits, or the system that makes it cost effective for people to live like that? IMO it's not the people at all, it's the system.
Maybe I'm just a cynical and jaded man these days - I dunno - but I'm personally not remotely proud to call myself British these days. Sorry.