John Lloyd's definition of "Anglosphere" which I think is one of the first to use the term does include South Africa and the British West Indies. What is your argument for leaving them out? I've been to South Africa and its character struck me as very "anglo" in many ways - not least with English being by far the most widely-spoken language these days.

He's talking about the white Anglosphere, I guess.

^No, lots of non-white people in the US and UK...a lot of Asians in Western Canada, like around the Vancouver area...

I just think of South Africa as more a part of Africa than an active part of this group, though I could be wrong.

And I left out the West Indies for the same reason I left out Belize--they're just so small and not really considered by the others I just don't know if they're as much a part of the club...those six nations (seven if we count SA) "know" each other pretty well, by which I mean that we have clear cultural views of all six...multiple cultural views for most of them...and all six are reasonably active on the international scale (the US, UK and Canada more than Ireland, New Zealand ans Australia.)

So there's a difference between the English-speaking world and "the Anglosphere," the former being all places where English is a prominent language and the latter being special in that these six/seven nations are arguably more strongly-related culturally and politically and otherwise. After all, if we just go by English-speakers, Israel has English as a main language spoken there, but we wouldn't usually lump it into "the Anglosphere," it's not a member of that "club."

...It just has a guest pass because its BFFs with the US and gets along OK with the UK, while everyone else is just trying to be polite...'cause you hate to bash your friend's other friends...you just bash someone else instead (like France.)

:p

I think you could argue, politically at least, that Belize and the West Indies are somewhat embraced within that Anglosphere: Westminster-type governments, membership in the Commonwealth, many of them actual Commonwealth realms (actually, the US is the odd one out in all of these situations, except that, like most of the rest, it's a settler state, too).

But culturally, and especially sub-culturally, you'd have to be really careful. Toronto would have a good deal more in common with, say, Victoria (or at least Melbourne), than it would with Alberta (minus Edmonton), and Alberta would have more in common with, say, Queensland, than with Toronto. And Mississippi would just be unique, LOL. On the other hand, I would expect they all collectively have more shared cultural feeling than any of them would have with, say, Bhutan.

I'm not sure I really said much there, but there it is.

@ obi

When you say anglosphere, do you mean the average American's view of the average Briton (or vice versa), or the American government's relationship with the British government?

@Gunfighter:

I kind of mean both, since there's a definite difference.

@Outside Smoker:

Well, all the others are settler states besides the UK, with the possible exception of Ireland, which you could argue was more a conquered territory than a settled state (I guess America and Canada and other areas were conquered, too, but we think of them as settled outreaches of the British Empire, whereas Ireland was mostly, for lack of a better word, an occupation, and the UK/Ireland relationship's arguably the most acrimonious one between members of this club, historically and otherwise.)


And that's definitely true...

Toronto, New York, LA, Sydney and London would have more in common with each other than they'd have with Quebec City, Dallas, Atlanta, and...um...I don't know Australian cities well enough to speak to their socio-political differences besides maybe an East/West divide, and for fear of picking the wrong English city to throw in with that pack, I'll let an Englishman do that themselves.) ;)

But yeah, they're still all relatively-closely tied together culturally and historically and politically...and at least on average, citizens from one country can visit or move to another such country in the club and they'd be fine and probably relatively welcome...though that'll definitely vary (I know an Australian friend of a friend of mine that visited the US, and liked it alright, and got along fine...T.S. Eliot and Henry James moved from the US to UK, and Christopher Hitchens from the UK to US, and of course plenty of Canadians traverse the US/CAN border, and the same goes for Americans--Americans would probably be the most difficult to pin down, since they can either enter in well or be loud and obnoxious or be perceived as such, and then there are cosmopolitan US cities were diversity's celebrated, and then there are areas that are pretty xenophobic and might take issue with even fellow Anglosphere members.)

From my perspective Canada, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand are the sort of countries you could go and live in and it'd be little different to moving to another part of Britain. The US is somewhat more foreign, although parts of it more so than others. London and New York are quite similar is many ways, both being gateways to the bowels of hell.

You know, obi, you pretty lost all credibility in my mind when you started saying Israel should be a theocracy.

Oh god Obi...you <gasp!!> lost credibility in Thucy's mind!!!!?! Ohnoooeeesss....

You must be shattered...

Congratulations, Obi. Thucy thinks you're incredible :)

Ah, Thucy.........

I said that I support Israel wanting recognition of its being a Jewish state, politically and culturally...that's NOT akin to wanting a theocracy, and I trust I don't have to say again that Judaism =/= a necessary belief to be Jewish, as you can be secular/agnostic and Jewish by birth and Jewish culturally, so wanting that acknowledged is not the same as saying "All power to the Theocratic Rabbis!"

That "Jewish state" argument is of course also a plot to forestall talks until Israel either gets what it wants out of them or else is hit by more rocket fire and can regain the moral high ground and have more leverage to get what it wants...and in the practical sense it's Israel trying to discourage a mass influx of potentially armed-and-angry Palestinians returning, since Israel of all nations KNOWS what happens when you mix a mass influx of potentially-hostile immigrants with their being armed and potentially-supported by foreign powers in their goal for statehood, and would understandably like to avoid a replay of 1947-1949, since they won that round and, understandably, don't wish to have to fight it again.

Aaaaaaaand not even krellin is taking you seriously, Thucy...

Aaaaaaaand this has fuck all to do with the Anglosphere so.......

I'm glad you find me so incredible. Trust me--I find you even more unbelievable. :)

And if New York and London are gateways to the bowels of hell, Octavious...

1. You clearly haven't been to the Western Equivalent and Gate to Hell, LA...

2. No one ever DOES get into Hell in LA, though...the traffic's too backed up... ;)

3. Sign me up for Hell, I guess, I'd rather live in any of three cities (or Sydney, Toronto, San Francisco) any day over most of Middle America.

4. Joyce can go on about Dublin and Galway all he wants to...eh...they seem both very interesting and like a very good place for me to get killed (insert your own joke there) :p

5. Can't really think of a city for New Zealand that'd match all those.

6. Bonus question to all--

If you had to live in a different city than the one you live in now, and had tp pick one from the Anglosphere...where would you pick? And let's say you can't pick your own country.

Not even krellin takes me seriously? A maxim for you, then: if krellin takes you seriously, there is probably same grave ethical error you are guilty of e.g. racism, hatred, selfishness, etc.

And also, officially associated the state with a religion creates a state religion which invites theocracy. And before you say UK with CoE: what the UK does is outdated as hell and should be changed immediately. You want Israel to take a step backward. Being anything other than a secular democracy in 2014 is ethically suspect. And no you cannot be a secular government if you are officially associated with a religion, nor can you meaningfully pretend people outside that group will be treated fairly.

"And no you cannot be a secular government if you are officially associated with a religion, nor can you meaningfully pretend people outside that group will be treated fairly."
That doesn't undo the fact that the UK and Denmark and Iceland (and maybe the Netherlands? redhouse can correct me on the Dutch if I'm wrong about that) are actually officially associated with state religions and yet would generally be considered secular. Certainly none of them would be considered theocratic.

"You want Israel to take a step backward."

What part of "Jewish state is compatible with secularism because YOU CAN BE JEWISH AND SECULAR" do you not get?

Do you not get that you can be Jewish and secular?

If so, you really have no place commenting on the matter, as you can hardly comment on the consequences of a Jewish state if you don't even know what it is to be Jewish or what Jewish is or can mean.

Also, +1 Outside Smoker.

All the members of UKUSA (aka Anglosphere) have a majority population of British (or thereabouts) ancestry (aka White People). The U.S. has a lot of ex-Germans but they are OK because they pretend to be English.

Go Team!

I don't think it has anything to do with colour. A Bulgarian is a lot more foreign than an Indian, for example (well, in certain parts of India anyway). There are even some mainland European nations which feel normal, and then there are others that are culturally different enough in a few important ways that after a day or so you just want to punch people.

^I agree...except with the punching people part.

The last 50, 60 years have seen the Anglosphere become more "colorful," with the US leading the way in racial diversity and the UK seeing some of that too post-colonialism...

I think a shared language, cultural heritage and virtues (each of which strengthen the others in that relationship, it's a lot easier to have shared cultural ideals when you can communicate them easily via a shared language and consume one anther's books, films and TV shows with more ease than you might those of a foreign culture with a foreign language) plays a bigger part than ethnic similarity.

@ obi

" I agree...except with the punching people part"

That's because you've never traveled to Italy with female company.

...You're going to have to clarify your point there, as traveling to Italy with female company sounds like a FUN time...

Unless you mean every Roman was trying to have their own personal Roman Holiday with them?

Well, you know those nice little cultural norms that say men on public transport really shouldn't be squeezing the arse of every woman between the ages of 12 and 60 because they generally don't appreciate it? They don't exist in Italy. And if leering was an Olympic sport Italy would clear up on the medals table.

Not to mention that Rome is full of gypsies that seem to be going out of their way to meet every stereotype you've ever heard... And the least said about nuns the better.

The real question is why do any of you buy into Obi's none-too-thinkly-vieled racist questioning to begin with. First off, asking if Anglosaxons some how have a superior "cultural exchange"? Uhhhh..what? Yeah, Obi, outside of white culture, there is no cultural exchange...<rolls eyes...>

The real question Obi is asking without asking, is he wants you to explain why Obi views the non-white world (let's say, Africa, South America and Asia) is somehow inferior and backwards? That fact that all you suckers have been wrapped up in this douchebags blatantly racist line of quetioning is simply amazing.

If I had asked the original OP, you fucktards would have pinned me to a wall. What the hell is wrong with you all?

Yes, Obi, alllllllllll of the non-white world sucks. Is that what you wanted to here, Jebus Killer? Racist much?

/\ Ironic, isn't it?

Oh don't be such a bore, krellin. Honestly, you're worse than the Lefties when you want to be.

Worse than the lefties? Bahhh...impossible. But whiel you may find my post disagreeable, I assure you that at the heart of it is yet another ugly truth about the fucking libtard left wingers around here, and there ever-present racism.

Ever been to fucking Japan or Korea? The west - the "anglosaxons" - exchange culture with Asia fairly regularly, and visa versa. We fully embrace many aspects of Hispanic culture. We have strong political ties with Non-anglo countries.

The very question posed is so blatantly bigotted is makes my mind spin.

It is in the same vein as our Chief Bigot Thucy, when he starts telling us how non racists and misogynist he is, and clicks off his minority friends to prove it, and then in teh very same breath tells us how non-whites and women are dificient *souly* based upon their pigmentation and sexual plumbing, and that they can not possibly succeed with a white dude's help. The implied racism of such a stance is enough to make a slave-master vomit....and it is the same thing in Obi-tards racist line of questioning here.

Ahhhh...the ever-present soft-racism of Libtardism is alive and well...

Ah...you have have to get up especially early in the morning (or perhaps just go without sleep period) to meet krellin levels of idiocy...

"The real question Obi is asking without asking, is he wants you to explain why Obi views the non-white world (let's say, Africa, South America and Asia) is somehow inferior and backwards?"

One of my favorite novels is One Hundred Years of Solitude...

...written by a South American author, Gabriel Garcia-Marquez?

Lots of good singers come from South America?

Tons of great technological innovation that I use every day comes from Asia (not to mention the fact they're kicking White People's Asses when it comes to the tech sector period.)

Africa...admittedly of the regions on Earth that'd be the continent I'm least interested in, since I like big cities and hate the outdoors, and most of the sites to see there are wildlife or outdoors-based.

Frankly, if I'm going to name inferiors here, krellin, I'd say whatever state spawned you would be a good place to start. :)

But hey, I'm just a Libtard Jeezus Killah (I'd call you a bigot, but that's a bit like calling Will Ferrell obnoxious or Kim Kardashian vain.)

And my President--YOUR President-0is BLACK, krellin...

And I voted for the man.

How do I like only the Wide World of Whiteys again?

@Octavious:

Well that sounds...sexist...and yet, fair or not, kind of what I'd expect from Italy...

I'd still want to go, but I don't know how much my female friends might like it...although a friend of mine went after she graduated high school and loved it there...so maybe she was one of the lucky few who didn't get accosted?

obi - ahhhh...your inner-Thucy has made itself present. "I'm not racist, I voted for the black guy...". Yeah. right. and you ask a question about the anglo blah blah blah and completely ignore the **vast** amount of cultural and political exchange between the US and non-anglo nations.

Bigotted asshole.