Cameron Shaming the Country

Comparing population and square kilometres is pointless, how many mountain ranges does England have?

RQ, I agree! Why would anyone give credence to anything that Alex Salmond says anyway.... Unless they are a Scot and an SNP supporter.

of not the first who.

The message wasn't in the least bit "coded" POGS.

Are you saying there isn't a group in this country who English people who are xenophobic and/or overly nationalistic and are often what some would term as "ignorant" and "boorish or a press that follows that line and panders to that view.

If you believe that these people simply don't exist then we would have to agree to disagree. If you do believe they do then what word/s would you use so that people can easily understand that is the group you are describing?

I too understood how the term 'Little Englander' was used in 'context' to preceding posts.
Hence I responded to davref and said alongside the 'Little Englander' jibe it was a 'hat trick'.

The term Little Englander can reproduce many variants as to it's 'use' of meaning so the 'context' of how, when and where it is used is the key to understanding how it was meant to be considered , rather than producing dictionary definitions that can be skewed /adapted to suit your criteria for it's usage.

I don't think there are many who are unable to interpret the 'coded' message behind the given moment it is spoken nor written .

The problem with the term in general is it raises a point in question as to it's racist connotation when used in a certain manner/context, hence it is one of those terms that is best given good consideration before using it .

I wish to add I do not consider any post on this thread to have any racist context!

[like] [like] [like] RQ (do you ever sleep?!)

Or, to quote Humpty Dumpty,' A word means whatever I choose it to mean!'

let's not start quoting the bible, it's the wrong thread.

I understand what you meant, gg - by using the term 'little englander' you were trying to describe the thoughts and behaviour of a certain group of people, similar to using the word 'swarm' to describe a group of people rushing in one direction with one purpose in mind.

If we go back to the OP and the views of a certain little scotlander, perhaps we should look at the facts as far as I can ascertain them:

Scotland is over 78,700 thousand square kilometres and has a population of about 5.5 million, at a density of 65 people per square kilometre and a fairly low birthrate.

England is about 130, 000 square kilometres, has a population of approximately 55 million at a density of over 407 people per square kilometre

Surely the Scottish Parliament has the capability to make a decision about offering refuge to those in need - and a great deal of spare capacity by the look of it, without a certain scotsman trying to make political divisions over the fate of desperate people.

So it was. It's still just a description of a group who behave/believe specific things and not different to any of the other descriptions I gave as examples. To some Tory would be an insult to others it is just what they are. If you (one) come under the description why would you complain - that is your view of life.

As for making mountains out of molehills - you have just replied three times to my post. Going back to Christianity I think perhaps a look at "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?" might be worthwhile.

My comments were very much related to this thread btw.

I understand very well, how you used the little englander remark and it was posted before the post about Christian teachings.You answered davref's post
Who wrote at length about Europe doing more than us as a country.

You are making a mountain out if a molehill Gracesgran.

Telling teacher?

Ana, roses You do not seem to understand or possibly do not want to understand that it wasn't a jibe - it was a description of a group of people.

My post was not about whether anyone is concerned with the plight of the refugees although some people have made it plain that they have other concerns which they think are more important. My post was about a) whether we are still a Christian country and b) what influences us in this day and age some of which seems to outweigh any influence we may have from Christian teachings.

I get that you either do not understand that this was what I said (although it was quite clear) or you are choosing not to understand and draw something from it that I did not write. You both choose to make personal comments and criticisms; neither of you has chosen to reply to the actual point I made. You, at least, roses know that I am quite prepared to report personal remarks and that GN do not like them. My comments are not about anyone personally; your comment are neither related to the thread or challenging the points I made you just continue to make personal and somewhat offensive remarks.

your use of the little englander jibe was noticed by quite a few on here GG.
you don't seem to notice that, or choose to ignore it.
We are all concerned by the plight of the refugees from Syria, and IMO this country is doing as much as it possibly can , both in taking them in over the next few years and in donating money directly to the camps.

It does appear that you don't like sarcasm being directed back at you, although you're quite happy to dish it out Gracesgran. How sad.

roses I suggest you read what I wrote to Ana about getting personal.

We all use words like "Tory", "Labour Party", "left of centre", "right of centre" "far left", and "far right" as they sum up something we can all (usually) understand. If I have used the word before it will also have been to sum up a group who behave and believe in a particular way - as I did here.

Usually I don't need to say I find personal remarks rather than points of discussion "sad" because I don't bother to reply; there is no point. How many other people have you taken it upon yourself to criticise for the way they write or is it just me? I was replying to someone else's point or have you taken it upon yourself to ban me from doing that?

There you go again Ana getting personal and accusing me of lecturing - very much a no, no for GN as I understand it. I was balancing a point someone else had put forward and so far no one has challenged what I said just, in your case, the way I say it. Yet again resorting to the personal rather than true arguments. As I said before - very sad. Do you actually have any opinion about what influences our population or do you just want to have a go at me.

GG... Once again you have missed the point.You have used the little englander phrase before now, on other threads, it seems to be one you like.it adds nothing to the debate.you also like the word 'sad' as you seem also to like using that.You also seem to like lecturing people.

That would be helpful, Gracesgran. Plain speech is always the best plan when lecturing the ignorant and uninformed.

Well said Jackthelad! My sentiment exactly, DC is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

I am sorry you didn't understand it Ana. It is obviously my fault for not communicating my argument clearly so that you could. I will try harder next time.

I am sure, if you had actually read it, this was clear Ana

I've read every post on this thread, Gracesgran. So it obviously wasn't clear, not only to me either.