Jump to content

Australian vs American culture


Bruce Tuncks

Recommended Posts

For a comparison between US culture and Australian culture look at this, which was started up at least as far back as 24th November 2020.........

 

http://treeofliberty.me/2020/11/24/jan-17th-2021-the-largest-armed-protest-ever-to-take-place-on-american-soil-is-scheduled/

 

I do realise that it doesn't speak for the 'normal' person over there, but maybe it does reflect the mindset of 74 million who voted trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

I do realise that it doesn't speak for the 'normal' person over there, but maybe it does reflect the mindset of 74 million who voted trump.

 

Yes not the majority but a worryingly large minority, large enough to cause significant problems for civil society.

Edited by octave
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, onetrack said:

A country with tens of thousands of Nukes

Just a small correction. That was in the Cold War days at the peak of nuke ownership. These days a bit over 6,000 total, less those awaiting disposal gives a real total of around 3,800. Only around 1,300 deployed and active. Russia has a few hundred more. A lot safer world now; we can only get blown up a couple of thousand times.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, pmccarthy said:

The  most divisive president of the USA? Abe Lincoln.

In any country which allows freedom of thought and expression, half the population will be for you, and half agin ya'.

 

One of the most famous sayings attributed to Abraham Lincoln is about deception:

You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

 

It's attributed to him, but may not have been his to own. The concept was an old one. An intriguing precursor appeared in a popular 1684 work of apologetics titled: “Traité de la Vérité de la Religion Chrétienne” by Jacques Abbadie who was a French Protestant based in Germany, England, and Ireland.

 

The following passage appeared in chapter two: 

… ont pû tromper quelques hommes, ou les tromper tous dans certains lieux & en certains tems, mais non pas tous les hommes, dans tous les lieux & dans tous les siécles.

One can fool some men, or fool all men in some places and times, but one cannot fool all men in all places and ages.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a claim in one of the comments "They will never take our right to defend ourselves." From whom? Someone else defending what he sees as his rights. They feel naked without a gun. Would rather walk down the street without pants on than to go without a gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, old man emu said:

In any country which allows freedom of thought and expression, half the population will be for you, and half agin ya'.

 

One of the most famous sayings attributed to Abraham Lincoln is about deception:

You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

 

It's attributed to him, but may not have been his to own. The concept was an old one. An intriguing precursor appeared in a popular 1684 work of apologetics titled: “Traité de la Vérité de la Religion Chrétienne” by Jacques Abbadie who was a French Protestant based in Germany, England, and Ireland.

 

The following passage appeared in chapter two: 

… ont pû tromper quelques hommes, ou les tromper tous dans certains lieux & en certains tems, mais non pas tous les hommes, dans tous les lieux & dans tous les siécles.

One can fool some men, or fool all men in some places and times, but one cannot fool all men in all places and ages.

 

 

Another famous one of Abe Lincoln's was "Quotations on the internet are often attributed to the wrong person."

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all the hullabaloo by the Yanks about the Second Amendment right to possess firearms we should keep in mind the wording of that Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

If those making the racket now are for real, why is it that when the State declares war, it has to conscript people to secure its freedom. Why aren't these Second Amendment die-hards storming the recruiting offices?

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, if the Constitution is held to be inviolate since the day it was penned (or "quilled"), then surely the arms that the people have the right to bear should be limited to those available at the time of said quilling?

Lets see them doing mass shootings with a muzzle-loading Brown Bess.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree Bruce.

For example, I've seen indigenous disingenuously using a tinny, powered by 40 horse Johnson (the Kingswood of Torres Strait) to 'hunt'  a bunch of turtles in quick time, where the true traditional dugout would have taken most of the day to bring back one turtle.

 

The turtles are in decline a(to be fair there are other causes as well) but one lot of experts call this 'traditional hunting', but ignore the over harvesting that contributes to decimation of turtle numbers.

 

Similar story to 'traditional hunting' on land using a Toyota and rifles to 'hunt' meat. Granted, there isn't a big shortage of 'roos, but it isn't a traditional practice.

 

PS, this isn't thread drift. The USA and Australia both seem to do this.

Edited by nomadpete
added the disclaimer
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...