The Peculiarities of the Anglosphere; or, what is America and her place in the West?
#1
In recent times it has become commonplace to refer to nations of Britain (or England, depending on your interpretation), Canada, America, Australia and New Zealand (and sometimes South Africa) as the "Anglosphere". This obviously happens because it is a useful descriptor. But what exactly is the Anglosphere? Well at its simplest definition it seems to mean "those countries that are England and her 'white settler colonies'": of course this definition is not wholly complete as it leaves some nations in doubt: Is (or was) South Africa an Anglosphere nations due its significant 'Anglo' presence, or was it not because of the supremacy of the Dutch-descended Boers, who declared independence from the British Crown? Would Rhodesia have been an Anglosphere nation if its government survived, even if it was not majority white and being independent from the Crown, despite having "white settler policies"?
And of course this then turns us to the more nebulous definition: What is America's position in the Anglosphere? Because on one hand it seems to be the 'imperial capital' of the other four nations, who at varying degrees of loyalty are 'protectorates' of America (cf. their participation in America's expeditionary wars), and derive the majority of their pop culture from the United States. But on the other hand there is an evident distaste for America expressed in the other nations, and furthermore most of the public in those nations would describe each other (especially the UK, Australia and New Zealand) as more similar to each other than either of them are to America (Canada's anti-Americanism seems to be of a different variety, probably an expression of their seemingly non-nationhood, rather than a reaction against an encroaching 'foreign' cultural influence). Or is what is percieved as 'Anti-Americanism' actually a reaction against modern degenerate consumerism, that just so happened to begin in the United States?
And what is the actual 'category' of the Anglosphere? Is it a 'civilization', distinct from Europe, or is simply a sub-category of a larger whole? is the Anglosphere a necessary enemy to 'mainland Europe', or not?

I myself would like to know the opinions others have in regards to this topic.
#2
Protestantism has a different spatiality.  In this sense, it includes the Dutch.   Theological forms defining space, Being and beings within space.  Still essential even when secularized.  Different from Catholic society.
#3
The anglosphere was responsible for sabotaging any attempt of european unification by anu continental power,wheter be against the habsburg in the xvi century,against france in the xviii century and napoleonic wars,against Russia during the Crimean war/russian-ottoman wars,against Germany during both world wars and the host of jewish merchants after Cromwell and the spread of liberal-egalitarian-cosmopolitan/globalist ideas,nevertheless the anglosphere was responsible for the spread of the White race across the Seas,unfortunately after the WW2 the anglosphere has become the center of Anti White hatred,lgbt degeneracy,feminism,miscegenation and other tenets of Gay Nigger Communism.
#4
If the Anglosphere were to be considered something apart from Europe than the Netherlands would cleave to the Anglosphere. Not sure if I'm willing to make that jump.
#5
I don't see England and her daughters as in any way meaningfully separated from the rest of the West. In terms of art, science, philosophy, politics, etc. England is intimately connected to Europe from the Gothic era of 1000 or so until today. I have always thought of England as an odd marginal extension of Europe, perhaps the extreme of Western values - "too European for Europe."

I am curious to hear the reasons people would give for the Anglosphere being a separate civilization, aside from just the scale and spread of its peoples denying it a slot in the comfy wholesome chungus EU community of quirky small Yuro nationalities. All of the distinctly "English" or "Anglo" values which I typically hear given - the desire to spread out into the infinite, the need for exploration and conquest, the quest for infinite knowledge and earthly perfection via science and liberal reform, the staunch individualism - are all simply Western values, and are by and large shared by the other nations of (properly Western) Europe as well, only in slightly less extreme forms. This is much easier to discern if you compare England and the rest of the West to non-Western cultures - the differences between the first two seems very minuscule indeed compared to the chasm between them and the third.

I see it as more or less inevitable that America shall be to Western Civilization as the Roman Empire was to Classical Civilization (a mantle which could have and perhaps should have gone to Germany, as Spengler speculated in 1911), and as such I believe that CANZUK will converge with America, faster than ever thanks to modern technology. The "dislike" which these people have of America are complaints of luxury, the whinings of a spoiled brat who doesn't have to work for anything himself. Other Europeans do the same thing, despite being obviously humiliated American economic and military pawns and satraps. Much as militarily powerful and culturally dry Rome reduced the source of its culture, Greece, to a series of minor provinces, so too has America reduced the once-culturally-rich Europe to a series of provinces.

However, much as the political, economic, and cultural center of the Roman Empire eventually moved East towards Greece, so too may the center of American power shift back towards Europe. Or it may be that America becomes culturally colonized by Mexican death-cultists much as Late Rome was culturally colonized by Semitic Magian monotheists, shifting its focus southward to Latin America as the rest of its empire crumbles into disrepair after a few centuries of space-faring Western imperium mundi and Europe is left back to its own devices. Perhaps Europe shall create a new post-Western culture then, or will join and contribute to a potential rising Russian culture.
#6
Ontological Error!

Conflating all historic events of the British empire together as something comprehensive of that Abstracts nature doesn’t account for any of the specific peculiarity of that time and borders on Countersigning a nations right to work within its own interest. 

AngloSphere only referees to the modern nation it’s held within, it’s not another name for the British Empire or Anglo interests.

Also AngloSphere by its nature can’t be responsible for anything, it’s not some living entity. It’s an abstraction used to describe a connect Cultural/Political region. It is, it can only be predicated as a current state.

(03-10-2023, 12:00 AM)Guest Wrote: The anglosphere was responsible for sabotaging any attempt of european unification by anu continental power,wheter be against the habsburg in the xvi century,against france in the xviii century and napoleonic wars,against Russia during the Crimean war/russian-ottoman wars,against Germany during both world wars and the host of jewish merchants after Cromwell and the spread of liberal-egalitarian-cosmopolitan/globalist ideas,nevertheless the anglosphere was responsible for the spread of the White race across the Seas,unfortunately after the WW2 the anglosphere has become the center of Anti White hatred,lgbt degeneracy,feminism,miscegenation and other tenets of Gay Nigger Communism.

Replying to this
#7
(03-10-2023, 12:09 AM)JohnnyRomero Wrote: I don't see England and her daughters as in any way meaningfully separated from the rest of the West. In terms of art, science, philosophy, politics, etc. England is intimately connected to Europe from the Gothic era of 1000 or so until today. I have always thought of England as an odd marginal extension of Europe, perhaps the extreme of Western values - "too European for Europe."

I am curious to hear the reasons people would give for the Anglosphere being a separate civilization, aside from just the scale and spread of its peoples denying it a slot in the comfy wholesome chungus EU community of quirky small Yuro nationalities. All of the distinctly "English" or "Anglo" values which I typically hear given - the desire to spread out into the infinite, the need for exploration and conquest, the quest for infinite knowledge and earthly perfection via science and liberal reform, the staunch individualism - are all simply Western values, and are by and large shared by the other nations of (properly Western) Europe as well, only in slightly less extreme forms. This is much easier to discern if you compare England and the rest of the West to non-Western cultures - the differences between the first two seems very minuscule indeed compared to the chasm between them and the third.

I think the main catalyst for this kind of idea is the fact that the English-speaking New World is the one part of said New World which has countries that are both majority white (for now), wealthy and powerful, i.e what one would use to define an "important country". This gives Britain (or more specifically England) a raison d'etre for trying to focus on 'the Commonwealth' and America, while disregarding Europe. Of course one can debate that this is a stupid idea and that Britain is as dependent on Europe as any other European country, but I am talking about the mindset. The only other 'Western European' country that I can imagine having a similar worldview is France, although they still seem bullish on the EU (at least compared to England), and their relationship with their former colonies is more like a helicopter parent than anything like the Anglo 'fellowship' that England likes to imagine.
It may also be that discussion of the 'uniqueness' of the Anglosphere is actually just a roundabout way to talk about the eccentricism of the United States. Myself, being raised in Australia, has always perceived America as this sort of 'land of opportunity' - my grandparents would come back from visiting and give me and my brothers shirts made there because we assumed they were higher quality because they were 'made in America' - and also importantly a land of 'eccentrics', whether they be religious fanatics or megalomaniac entrepreneurs. This I believe demonstrates a cultural division between America (and maybe Canada as well) with the rest of the Anglosphere: that America has an optimistic individualistic culture while the UK/Australia/Kiwiland have a pessimistic collectivist mindset: I feel this is best demonstrated in the comedy of each nation which is one of the best indicators overall of a nation's culture due to the idiosyncrasies of humour. For example, British obsession on self-deprevation.
Of course, this can also just be a reflection of 'two halves' of Anglo culture (or maybe even Protestant culture): the individual and the collective you could say. If we are going by the thesis in books like Albion's Seed, then it can easily be seen that this is just the expression of different founding ethnic groups deriving from the British Isles.
#8
Another point to add: In regards to female 'slaggy' fashion in Australia is also essentially 1:1 with Britain, see https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cd846ueDy...MTA2M2Y%3D
Also the archetype of "Deano" is completely transferable without any break in meaning (even the name reflects an Australia form of diminutive, using the suffix '-o'). Yet in America this I believe would be completely lost in translation.
Why does this happen? Is this genetic or something else?
#9
(03-10-2023, 12:00 AM)Guest Wrote: european unification by any continental power

Tranimal. Good riddance.
#10
The difference is (or rather, was) one of energy. In a way, Anglos (but most north Europeans really) have a bit more "frontier spirit" that "Roman Europe" lost due to great age.

You can already see this approach with how various European powers treated their colonies: Whereas the French, Spaniards and Portuguese mostly took a "just manage it" approach, the Anglo took a tad more radical approach of building something new outright. This is of course, greatly reductive (London initially sought the other way as well, but the colonial settlers didn't want any of it, see: the Proclamation Line).

Lately, this spirit seems to be exhausting itself in the Anglosphere as well. You can see this in the approach to warfare now: just manage it, have vague goals, constant pointless "maintenance." What will happen in the future regarding this is dubious.
#11
(03-09-2023, 11:08 PM)casual rapist Wrote: Protestantism has a different spatiality.  In this sense, it includes the Dutch.   Theological forms defining space, Being and beings within space.  Still essential even when secularized.  Different from Catholic society.

Please say more. Especially address why ANGLO colonialism was so different from German. Seems far more plausible that the British were influenced by the great number of seafaring invasions in history to become more corporately-minded (i.e. just). Could this apply to the Dutch too?
Appears to me that the Catholic-Protestant distinction may merely be indirect, via a different philosophy of monarchy which led to more formalised race relations in Catholic colonies. Probably worked very well in some places, but made easy pickings in the inauguration of 20th C universalism.
#12
I would like to mention the perception of America, at least here in Australia, can be summarised in two words: weird, wealthy.
Weird because of the inherent eccentricity of its inhabitants, whether it's in religion or just the 'entrepreneurial' spirit of its inhabitants. I guess this also extends itself into a negative stereotype: I've hard 'American' as an insult similar to 'stupid' or 'silly' throughout my life. "Don't be like those Americans". I wonder if this is due to any actual opposition to the American lifestyle or simply a reaction from any fleeting British influence. This mostly shows itself in reaction to American political life (ironically America is the only country I recall having their elections covered on national television here - although that may have just been the extraordinary nature of 2016, although Brexit wasn't given the same treatment IIRC) and American religiosity.
and wealthy (and also 'where the action is') in many small things: I've had people come back from the States and give out t-shirts and paper bags you put your groceries in due to a perceived 'quality' that America produces, but it's more prominently perceived due to many inconveniences we have here: no great variety in fast food joints (I know, goyslop, but we watch a lot of American media and it grows on you seeing the variety of food America has); expensive shipping (or not even being able to ship at all); greater availability in servers for more obscure multiplayer games; region locked content; etc. And in regards to 'the action', I think this has less to do with America as a whole but more just the Northern Hemisphere as a whole, specifically Europe. For example, whenever there is a convention here there will always be one 10x better in the U.S. or Europe. But I think America gets more focus as it is the 'imperial capital' as others have called it, and so anyone who wants to 'make it big' has to move there (not the least because of how much America pays certain professions, like software developers or people in biomed). It's just the all pervasive feeling that here we get the 'leftovers', a nation that is 'stagnant' or 'slow' you could say.
#13
One of Mikka's more interesting observations was when he said Americans copy from British culture. This is, imo, absolutely true on every level. At some point I will have to do more effortful post on what I call the inaccuracy of the American stereotype. The idea of Americans as these energetic, patriotic and forceful people with strong beliefs. It couldn't be further from the truth, Americans of modernity are more like sarcastic, nihilistic conformists. The world's perception of America is based on a long extinct stereotype.
#14
It's funny to me that so many Australians seem to have a real hatred for and resentment towards America and Americans because in my experience Americans tend to have a positive view of Australia and Australians. There's a great deal of similarity between them. Australia is like a much more culturally British version of America. Oftentimes when I'm talking to someone from Australia or the UK it feels like they are on offense and constantly trying to catch me in some shibboleth where they can lord themselves over me for not knowing some random bit of information about their country. Normally they are unsuccessful, because I'm just so worldly and knowledgeable, but it really rubs me the wrong way. Maybe this cultural Britishness is the source and they've just inherited resentment on the basis of America eclipsing Britain in power and influence. Can't say I don't understand that. New Zealanders don't seem to act this way, on the other hand, but that could be a sampling error.
#15
(03-14-2023, 08:03 PM)a system is failing Wrote: One of Mikka's more interesting observations was when he said Americans copy from British culture.  

This may be true to some extent(Americans copy from British culture) but I think it’s important to understand that Mikka came to this conclusion before he had evidence for it. Any evidence he’s adduced to corroborate his assertion have been happy accidents.
#16
(03-14-2023, 08:12 PM)Muskox Wrote: It's funny to me that so many Australians seem to have a real hatred for and resentment towards America and Americans because in my experience Americans tend to have a positive view of Australia and Australians. There's a great deal of similarity between them. Australia is like a much more culturally British version of America. Oftentimes when I'm talking to someone from Australia or the UK it feels like they are on offense and constantly trying to catch me in some shibboleth where they can lord themselves over me for not knowing some random bit of information about their country. Normally they are unsuccessful, because I'm just so worldly and knowledgeable, but it really rubs me the wrong way. Maybe this cultural Britishness is the source and they've just inherited resentment on the basis of America eclipsing Britain in power and influence. Can't say I don't understand that. New Zealanders don't seem to act this way, on the other hand, but that could be a sampling error.

>Australians seem to have a real hatred of
Some do, I certainly don't. There are genuine grievances however, for example how our contribution to the Pacific front (especially in the theatres close to home like that in New Guinea and the Solomon Islands) are essentially brushed aside by popular culture and America is made out to be the sole nation who defeated Japan, and also the popular conspiracy theory that America overthrew our government once.
>Maybe this cultural Britishness is the source
That's certainly a big contributor but I also think it's a projection of the inner-hatred we have for how much potential we've squandered away. There are engineering schemes that, if put in place and combined with a government that actually had ambition, could easily make us a great power. Hell, we have the largest uranium deposits in the world and even with our desertified landscape we're a net exporter of food. It may also be a projection of our "luck", that is that we are essentially an African country in terms of an economy and yet somehow the average citizen here is wealthy compared to other similar economies, and so my compatriots feel envy towards a nation that, when compared to us actually produces value even if that is these days simply shitty apps on your phone.
>Australia is like a much more culturally British version of America
Maybe to an American but I and most others I know have always felt more of an affinity with England than America, which I really feel comes down to a more shared history (America only became important to Australia in the 1940s and personally I feel it took until the 90s with the Republic referendum and the previous decade's severing off the final ties Britain to really distance ourselves completely from her and pivot more to America). You can say it's inertia but there are just far more cultural similarities between us and Britain. This may also be really a reaction against the Black (and also maybe Jewish) influence that permeates America, which has no real historical analogue here (Aboriginals have never had the numbers nor the intelligence or creativity to be similar to blacks. Aboriginals have not made their own Jazz or Blues). HOWEVER, there are obvious similarities, for example in the structure of our government or our currency but ESPECIALLY our geography which lends itself to the sprawling suburbia that is also found in America. But even here we see disimilarities as we don't have the "new cities" that you find in (especially Western) America - an "Australian" America, geographically, would be like if you had only a few Bostons and New Yorks and then nothing else. Yet ultimately the vastness of the geography has led to similar 'car culture' and the mindset that comes with it.
#17
(03-14-2023, 09:01 PM)Guest Wrote: This may be true to some extent(Americans copy from British culture) but I think it’s important to understand that Mikka came to this conclusion before he had evidence for it. Any evidence he’s adduced to corroborate his assertion have been happy accidents.

I can't understand your logic. It's either true or it isn't, the timing of when he stated this has no bearing on the validity of evidence or the statement itself.
#18
(03-14-2023, 09:38 PM)a system is failing Wrote:
(03-14-2023, 09:01 PM)Guest Wrote: This may be true to some extent(Americans copy from British culture) but I think it’s important to understand that Mikka came to this conclusion before he had evidence for it. Any evidence he’s adduced to corroborate his assertion have been happy accidents.

I can't understand your logic. It's either true or it isn't, the timing of when he stated this has no bearing on the validity of evidence or the statement itself.

“May be true to some extent” it’s untrue and I disagree but I’m open to the possibility that it is.

“Timing” I was insinuating that he came to this conclusion from his resentment of American cultural monolith. A lot of his posts center on his British identity and a revival of British culture.  Taking this position leaves him at odds with American culture which is very wide spread. 

He came to the conclusion out of the necessity of his centering around British identity and it is not true(his observation).

Sorry for the confusion.
#19
(03-14-2023, 09:59 PM)Guest Wrote: “May be true to some extent” it’s untrue and I disagree but I’m open to the possibility that it is.

“Timing” I was insinuating that he came to this conclusion from his resentment of American cultural monolith. A lot of his posts center on his British identity and a revival of British culture.  Taking this position leaves him at odds with American culture which is very wide spread. 

He came to the conclusion out of the necessity of his centering around British identity and it is not true(his observation).

Sorry for the confusion.

The reason America follows the UK culturally is the same reason Americans are “stupid and backwards.” America unlike her island relatives over yonder is large, and because of how the constitution was set up it is difficult for a small clique of radical leftist to push “progressive” policy in the country. The left was only able to make headway In America by possessing a majority in the supreme court and then pushing their agenda.

It may seem like America follows the UK because the UK is more “progressive” unlike Americans who are “stupid and backwards”, but really American leftist just have a harder time then leftist in the UK.
#20
(03-15-2023, 01:14 AM)Guest Wrote:
(03-14-2023, 09:59 PM)Guest Wrote: “May be true to some extent” it’s untrue and I disagree but I’m open to the possibility that it is.

“Timing” I was insinuating that he came to this conclusion from his resentment of American cultural monolith. A lot of his posts center on his British identity and a revival of British culture.  Taking this position leaves him at odds with American culture which is very wide spread. 

He came to the conclusion out of the necessity of his centering around British identity and it is not true(his observation).

Sorry for the confusion.

The reason America follows the UK culturally is the same reason Americans are “stupid and backwards.” America unlike her island relatives over yonder is large, and because of how the constitution was set up it is difficult for a small clique of radical leftist to push “progressive” policy in the country. The left was only able to make headway In America by possessing a majority in the supreme court and then pushing their agenda.

It may seem like America follows the UK because the UK is more “progressive” unlike Americans who are “stupid and backwards”, but really American leftist just have a harder time then leftist in the UK.

And Britain is 'more progressive' than America in what way?



[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)