Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol he's talking about similarities between the UK and the Netherlands.
The language point is weak, many countries in Africa and Asia employ the English language, it doesn't make them more similar to the UK than other places in Europe.
LOL! Oh Okay, I didn't read the entire thread my bad.
It actually is closer. Measure distance to Boston and compare it with colonised Africa.
London to Massachusetts is 3200 miles (give or take)
Cairo is 2,200 miles (but Egypt was not a colony, it was a British protectorate, but not a colony).
Khartoum is 2,500 miles (Again Sudan was not a colony, and was a joint rule by Egypt and the British Empire)
British East Africa
Kampala is 4,000 miles (Uganda)
Nairobi is 4,200 miles (Kenya)
Zanzibar is 4,600 miles (Tanzania)
Harare is 5,100 miles (Zimbabwe)
British West Africa
Lagos 3,100 miles (Nigeria)
Accra 3,176 miles (Ghana formerly the Gold Coast)
While Nigeria is closer by great circle, from a growth of the British Empire it is further, since it was impractical to move large numbers of people and goods via a great circle. So before air travel travel distance to Africa would have been significantly further. Actually around 4,600 miles from Portsmouth. Boston by comparison by sea (avoiding travel through Ireland, and Nova Scotia) would be still be 3,200 miles but from Bristol.
However that said, say Brighton to Algiers (which are around the two closest points) are under 1000 miles.
The colonized qualifier of the claim is what causes it to be true (unless you consider Egypt a former colony, then it's false). If it's purely Africa to the UK, then it beats Boston by a country mile.
Even if most Americans are of German descent, there are far more if you combine British and Irish (I know they're different, but still). After all, we came from Britain, we're a former colony like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Why do you think we speak English over here? Only difference, we gained our independence earlier than others like Canada. We're far more influenced by Britain, as opposed to Germany, France, Italy, etc. Many Americans hate to admit it, since we did break away from Britain. However, it's true.
Your region of the country is far more British (English, Scottish, Ulster Scots, mostly) than the rest of the country.
The top reported white ancestry in most Southern counties is "American" and is mostly comprised of the aforementioned British ethnic groups. The extent to which other other white ancestries (e.g., German, Irish, Italian) are found is the South is mostly due to more recent migration from other areas of the country. The Cajuns are the most notable exception.
Good points. Clearly British and Dutch people share many common cultural traits, and I feel that I would be able to engage more with a Dutch person in English than an American person in English. While the shared language between the US and the UK unites us to some degree, there are also many significant differences that people constantly overlook, and I feel that a British person would have far, far more to talk about with a Dutch person, a German, a Swede or a Dane than an American. We would instantly bond over football and beer, and that's just for starters. Our hatred for Americans is another, lol. Pop culture is an important point. Take Eurodance and trance in general - look to the 90s and the early 2000s and you'll see countless trance tunes reaching the top spot in all European nations, UK included, but this music genre just cannot break into the mainstream in the US. US music stars will probably have a better chance of breaking into the UK mainstream simply because the US has a far larger music industry.
Anyone here remember The Ketchup Song - by a Spanish trio? It was all over the radio in 2002. It was UK number 1. It was also number 1 in every other European country. In the US, it barely broke the top 50, if that, if I recall. Music from the continent can easily break into the mainstream here, but in the US it can't.
Plus, both nations are constitutional monarchies and have a left-leaning populace in comparison to the more right-wing Americans, and British people sing from a similar hymn sheet to the rest of western Europe on social matters, whereas Americans appear comparatively backwards and conservative in their outlook. Sure, both the US and UK have Common Law, but that's as far as it goes. The politics in both nations is very different, and even now the UK is getting smaller parties into government while the US is still firmly Democrat of Republican.
The only reason why people assume the UK is more similar to the USA than to Western European Countries is because the US speak English while Netherlands for example don't.
There's more to culture than language and what country watches what TV show.
London to Massachusetts is 3200 miles (give or take)
Cairo is 2,200 miles (but Egypt was not a colony, it was a British protectorate, but not a colony).
Khartoum is 2,500 miles (Again Sudan was not a colony, and was a joint rule by Egypt and the British Empire)
British East Africa
Kampala is 4,000 miles (Uganda)
Nairobi is 4,200 miles (Kenya)
Zanzibar is 4,600 miles (Tanzania)
Harare is 5,100 miles (Zimbabwe)
British West Africa
Lagos 3,100 miles (Nigeria)
Accra 3,176 miles (Ghana formerly the Gold Coast)
While Nigeria is closer by great circle, from a growth of the British Empire it is further, since it was impractical to move large numbers of people and goods via a great circle. So before air travel travel distance to Africa would have been significantly further. Actually around 4,600 miles from Portsmouth. Boston by comparison by sea (avoiding travel through Ireland, and Nova Scotia) would be still be 3,200 miles but from Bristol.
However that said, say Brighton to Algiers (which are around the two closest points) are under 1000 miles.
The colonized qualifier of the claim is what causes it to be true (unless you consider Egypt a former colony, then it's false). If it's purely Africa to the UK, then it beats Boston by a country mile.
The US census numbers on ancestry are extremely dubious. Americans generally ignore English ancestry and report the "exotic" ancestry. So someone with one German grandparent tends to identify as "German-American", despite the fact that their other three grandparents are English/Scottish with surnames such as Greene, Johnson, Roberts, etc. Then there is the case of black Americans who are on average 20% European (British) but identify only as "black" or "African-American". Look at the last few censuses, and you notice that those reporting "British" ancestry significantly drops with each censuses by tens of millions. Unless they all stopped having kids, which did not happen, people are seriously under-reporting in favor of their more exotic ancestry (Irish, Italian, etc). The truth is that since the 1950's Americans have downplayed their English ancestry in favor of the more "cool" ancestry.
Ancestry.com did a study on the genetic origins of Americans called the Genetic Census of America. It came up with interesting results. The average percentage of each ethnicity in that state is represented as a decimal in the lower left hand corner. The Prevalence of British ancestry is significantly greater than any other ethnicity, including Dutch and German:
English & Scottish:
Irish:
Scandinavian:
Dutch & German:
Eastern Europe:
Italian & Greek (it is interesting how over-reported "Italian is on the censuses):
Spanish & Portuguese:
Logically, the results shouldn't be too surprising. The British settled the country, and accounted for the vast majority of white colonials. These colonials multiplied like rabbits and spread westwards, often with families of over ten children. There was mass migration from Germany, Holland, and Scandinavia beginning in the mid 19th century, but it was not enough to overwhelm the already British population that had already been established for two centuries. According to Ancestry.com, British (English & Scottish) is by far the most common ancestry among Americans. We can also see see this by looking at the 50 most common surnames in America:
SMITH
JOHNSON
WILLIAMS
BROWN
JONES
MILLER
DAVIS
GARCIA
RODRIGUEZ
WILSON
MARTINEZ
ANDERSON
TAYLOR
THOMAS
HERNANDEZ
MOORE
MARTIN
JACKSON
THOMPSON
WHITE
LOPEZ
LEE
GONZALEZ
HARRIS
CLARK
LEWIS
ROBINSON
WALKER
PEREZ
HALL
YOUNG
ALLEN
SANCHEZ
WRIGHT
KING
SCOTT
GREEN
BAKER
ADAMS
NELSON
HILL
RAMIREZ
CAMPBELL
MITCHELL
ROBERTS
CARTER
PHILLIPS
EVANS
TURNER
TORRES
Admittedly, many people from other Germanic-speaking nations anglicized their surnames (ex: Muller ----> Miller, Johansson ----> Johnson, Stein ------> Stone) but nonetheless American surnames are mostly British. Is it all a coincidence? I think not. If I can interject with my own experience, Australians are a very, very similar people to Americans. This is despite the fact that Australia was colonized after the US was already a fully-fledged independent nation, and despite the fact that the US has never owned Australia. So why are Australians so strikingly similar? The common link is our British background. That is why I can travel to say, New Zealand, with no knowledge about the place, and feel far more at home there than in French-speaking Quebec, a country only twelve hours from me that was controlled by the British for centuries. The difference is that there something fundamental that we share with Australians, New Zealanders, and British that we do not share with the Quebecois, or the Indians, or most other ex-British conquests. Regardless of how many British institutions or quirks they have inherited, these places remain fundamentally very different at their most base level.
That's very interesting, especially about ancestry self-identification. Many white Americans have ancestry from more than one European country. It could be that a large number of self-reported Germans in the US have significant British ancestry as well. Even if they don't, they were heavily Anglicized/Americanized and speak English.
I agree with you for the most part about the inherent similarities among Americans, English Canadians, Australian, New Zealanders, and the British.
I agree with the foreign thing. They certainly do see us as foreigners and they will treat us like that were as British people don't see them as foreign so much. I suppose that is as a result of the non-Anglo immigrant groups.
I think if anything though we are the closest country cultural tbh they can't deny that. (And lets just ignore Canada because it may as well be America). The Americans don't know anything about the UK, they think it is a small country with crumpets and tea but we must remember that this is the case for all other countries aswell.
I have to say that I disagree with Americans treating us like any other foreigners, we definitely have more in common with them than any other country by a country mile. When I go there it is definitely different but I don't feel like I am in a foreign country.
I must admit I did find it annoying being treated like a foreigner because most of the time it was by Indians and Puerto Ricans with an accent. Me and my family definitey noticed that these groups had their own culture seperate from the white Americans and even the blacks, we could absorb into their culture quicker than these people.I have to say I noticed that some of these groups had alot of resentment towards the British, there was also a defense mechanism that was constantly activated.
Oh and as for the ancestry, lets not go there. We all know that alot of them will ignore their English ancestry and put something exotic down, they will also put down "American" if their ancestors have been there since the colonial period i.e the Mayflower. I would have to say I would disagree with anyone on that point! I have watched ancestry dna videos and nearly all of the Americans are shocked because they were told stupid predictions/myths by their family.
I agree with you that Brits should be able to come here and be treated more as the closely related people they are rather than foreigners. If you're ever back in the States, don't let them make you feel awkward or unwelcome.
Ha. Thank you i'm coming back in July! I am visiting NYC and Washington, I want to see the monuments. I know we are foreigners but we were treated kind of like aliens lol.
I think some ethnic people have resentment towards the UK.
- We speak the same language, that's a huge one. Can the average British person watch an Italian TV show without subtitles, and even when he does, does he "get it"? Which European countries natively speak English?
- Our political traditions are rooted in English common law, not civil law. Which European countries use common law?
- We are a protestant majority country. Not only that, but many of us are Episcopal, also known as "Anglican" in Britain, the former state religion of England. How many European countries have a protestant majority?
- We were actually part of England before it became a globe-spanning superpower, even before Scotland joined up with England and became Great Britain. Our people literally came from England and pushed westward. No England, no United States. Which European countries were founded by the English?
- Once again, English & Scottish is the most common American ancestry according to DNA results. In which continental European country is British the most common ancestry?
- These are the 50 most common American surnames...look familiar? Which continental European country has mostly British surnames?
SMITH
JOHNSON
WILLIAMS
BROWN
JONES
MILLER
DAVIS
GARCIA
RODRIGUEZ
WILSON
MARTINEZ
ANDERSON
TAYLOR
THOMAS
HERNANDEZ
MOORE
MARTIN
JACKSON
THOMPSON
WHITE
LOPEZ
LEE
GONZALEZ
HARRIS
CLARK
LEWIS
ROBINSON
WALKER
PEREZ
HALL
YOUNG
ALLEN
SANCHEZ
WRIGHT
KING
SCOTT
GREEN
BAKER
ADAMS
NELSON
HILL
RAMIREZ
CAMPBELL
MITCHELL
ROBERTS
CARTER
PHILLIPS
EVANS
TURNER
TORRES
- Baseball, our national pastime comes from a game called rounders. It's basically the same game played at a more intense level. Rounders is a traditional British game. Sure, Brits prefer soccer now, but rounders is as British as it gets.
- Football comes from rugby. Know why we call it "football"? It's called that because the way people used to score was mostly by kicking field goals. Just like in rugby. Throwing the ball only became popularized during the mid 20th century. It used to be almost entirely running and kicking the ball for field goal.
- Fahrenheit was used primarily in English speaking countries until the mid 20th century. We are still using the original English measurement.
- The imperial system of measurement is a system of measurement that was only used by the English. Fun fact: The US government tried to force the people to switch to metric during the late 1800's and it was highly unpopular; the government gave in and let us continue with the imperial system.Nonetheless, I can tell a guy from England or Australia that I am 6' 4" and they know what that means. What other countries use English imperial measurement?
Now let's compare to the Netherlands, arguably the most similar continental European country to England.
- Different unintelligible language, need to translate to communicate
- Different religious traditions that were illegal in England for centuries
- Civil law derived from Napoleon, not common law derived from the British
- Never part of England or the UK, instead used to be part of the HRE, the "First Reich" of Germany
- Very little to no British ancestry or surnames
So that leaves us with...you both play soccer and use the metric system. Not a whole lot to go on. So you need a translator or to learn a foreign language to communicate with them, but they are more similar? That is utterly ridiculous.
P.S. I am not an anglophile, but these things need to be said because some of the comments here are simply absurd.
You just said all that needs to be said about it. Denial runs deep in this thread. UK is more similar to the Netherlands than the US? Oh buddy.... I'll run that by my English wife, she'll get a good laugh out of that one.
Those explain actions are very weak. By that basis (language, surnames, common law, head of state, religion etc), Barbados would be more like the UK than our closest neighbours.
Why not run it by people based in the UK with a knowledge of it plus the U.S. And Europe. It's obvious to anyone familiar with these entities that the UK has more in common/connection with Europe than the U.S.
If you don't believe that the Netherlands has more in common with the UK, that betrays one's lack of forethought. Both post colonial, similar climates, similar sporting culture, similar urbanity, similar transportation view, similar irreligiosity, both would be considered 'socialist' by Americans with respect to health and welfare, metric system and so on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
