Why is America such a cultural outlier?

Why is America such a cultural outlier? Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the UK are all virtually identical, but America has almost no resemblance to Britain anymore.

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    You know it's funny you should ask that, because America is sort of like Iran in this situation. And what I mean by that is: if you look at both Australia and New Zealand, they're in the southern hemisphere. They're closer to India than they are to Iran, right? Australian abbos are even related to South Indians. Now India, India kept its Hindu culture and stuff. But if you look at Iran, Iran lost its Indo-Aryan culture in favor of Shia Islam. They even let Arabic fuck the letter "P" outta their language. America is the same way. They got fucked by circumcision and McDonald's.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >They even let Arabic fuck the letter "P" outta their language.
      >Pe (پ) used to represent the phoneme LULZ, is a letter in the Perso-Arabic alphabet, based on bā' (ب) with two additional diacritic dots. It is one of the four letters that was created specifically for the Persian alphabet to symbolize sounds found in Persian but not Arabic, others being ژ ,چ and گ.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      What the fuck is the post

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >colony that became independent after rebelling 200 years ago is more different than colonies that became independent after peacefully federating 100 years ago
    whoah

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    because America fought a successful independence war to rid themselves of British political practices retard

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    to the obvious answer that America has been twice as long independent as the rest of the former colonies, they had an influx of many different european people, with germans becoming the biggest ethnic group after 1850

  5. 1 year ago
    inferus

    Declaration of independence. Fuck British monarchy, Satanic parasites wasting resources

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >MONARCHY IS.... LE BAD!
      >OLIGARCHY IS.... LE GOOD!

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Yes

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      All European countries (or really all countries in the world) had monarchies in this time frame. Of which the the UK was arguably the most liberal.

      • 1 year ago
        inferus

        NZ and AUS still send them millions of tax dollars every year. Parasites

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They only pay when they visit.

          In the UK all the income from crown estates goes to the gov, which then pays part of it back to them. So they don't truly cost the tax payer either.

          • 1 year ago
            inferus

            On average NZ pays then 7mil a year. Don't have aus figures but its prob 10 times that. They are good for nothing parasites and have done nothing for me and never will. They do not do anything useful or anything that is of utility to anyone. They are wasting resourves and I have yet to be convinced they have provided anyone any value for those resources that were forfeited to them because of the status of their inbred blood

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Hard to put a price tag on identity. But without monarchs you'd have some other kind of celebrity but now with less connection to the mythical past.

              Also, the hands of the Big Ben are on a pulley with Oliver Cromwell's corpse.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              This as well, fuck those Hanoverian-Windsors leeches.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Bruh, it's only 7 million dollars, that's barely anything in the grand scheme of things. The British royal family is a core part of the British and colonial identity, without the royal family you're just the diet version of America.

              • 1 year ago
                inferus

                That's 0.01% of NZs total tax revenue and could employee 150 skilled tradesmen every year. That's not barely anything. They are parasites. You would think you would try to convince me otherwise you be arguing some king of utility we gain from it but all you said was "it's not much money bro". Parasites.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                t. LaRouche

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the UK are all virtually identical

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      NZ and Aus are very similar to the UK. Similar slang, same sports, same cuisine. NZ and Aus also get far more British media than Canada. Aus is also the main place Brits immigrate to.

      Canada is basically the US with British manners.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I refuse to believe you've visited both the UK & Australia, and if you have your opinion is incomprehensible to me

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I am a Scot who has lived in England. Has an NZ mother, CAN paternal grandparents and family in Australia (who I have visited multiple times). I also have close friends from the US & Ireland and many Aus co workers.

          I probably have a much greater insight than you do.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        This is arguably the worst and least informed fucking take I have ever seen on this board.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    i don't know what you are even talking about. all anglo countries resemble each others. some feel more european, like ireland or scotland, or south africa for new worlders, some others feel more anglo, like canada or the usa.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      America is no longer Anglo. Hasn't been for decades.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >source: I browse /misc/ daily

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          No, I'm just not deluded. Culturally and more importantly demographically, the USA hasn't been majority Anglo for many decades.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            It's still culturally AND demographically Anglo.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Hate speech vs. Free Speech
              >Duty to Retreat vs. Stand Your Ground laws
              >Strong gun control vs. Right to Bear Arms
              >Regulated capitalism + welfare vs. Laissez faire capitalism
              If the USA can be considered "Anglo" then the only logical conclusion to make at that point is that the UK has somehow stopped being Anglo.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you look at the completely irrelevant israeli media and the inane topics it obsesses over to get an idea of what American culture and demographics are?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >israeli
                which is to say, democratic.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I can guarantee you that Scotland and Ireland are more like England than the US or Canada are.

      The Anglosphere is a a scale. With the US on one side and UK on the other. It goes:

      US-Can-Aus-NZ-UK

      Canada is the US with a greater Scottish influence and British manners. Aus is Norf FC left in a desert for 100 years. NZ is rural southern England cut off from pesky foreigners and with more space. These are all simplifications of course but are largely true.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous
      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        from france it feels like this:

        most anglo: england > new zaeland > canada > australia > usa > wales > ireland > scotland > south africa > contiental europe : non anglo

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I'd agree with this, probably would switch around Aus and Can though, Canada is too American to be considered truly Anglo.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Nah. Any take that puts half the UK nations behind the US in angloness is a bit weak.

            I personally wouldn't really consider SA an Anglo nation. In the same way I don't consider Singapore an Anglo nation (despite speaking a lot of English)

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          A lot of that is probably due to how UK news (Brexit & Scottish independence) is portrayed domestically in France. As well as your own history of contact between those various nations.

          Scotland had a large ( and latter dominate) Anglo population long before the act of union. It has also contributed considerably to many of the nation's you consider to be more Anglo than Scotland.

          My opinions are based on having a deep knowledge of the cultural and social factors. How people view themselves in relation to others. This is assisted a lot by having a large amount of daily contact with almost all the nationalitiea involved.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            not him, but what about south africa?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              South Africa differs from the other nations in that it is not primarily made up off settlers from the UK. Or has that as a initial basis. I would put them in the same bracket as Nigeria, Singapore, Malta and so on. English is a common language, but Anglo culture itself has never been predominant. Its Anglo adjacent maybe (amongst whites). The Dutch aren't that far from the Anglos anyway.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Excepting individualism, ROI is more like the UK than either France or SA on this scale.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Aside from parliamentary government and the metric system, Canada doesn't have much in common with the UK.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    are Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the UK even seperate countries? They all serve the same queen.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Foreign immigrants left cultural impressions. Germans, for example, left christmas trees, candy canes, loan words (kindergarden, stark, kaput, uber), hot dogs, sauerkraut (usually on Ruebens or hot dogs), hamburgers (or at least the patties) and so on.

    My point is that immigrants sprinkle culture in to varying degrees. The most obvious influences are Germans, and Italians. But Brit influence is still there, like Thanksgiving comes from the English

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Canada is nothing like the UK, kek.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Same politics, same culture, same beliefs.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Same politics, same culture, same beliefs.
        In what way, retard?
        Canada has a liberals vs conservatives political system where the socialist party is a powerless 3rd party. UK has a socialists vs conservatives political system where the liberal party is a powerless 3rd party.
        Canada is overly polite and takes offence to a lot of things, UK is full of based banter boys who will insult you and call you cunt and think nothing of it.
        Canada still has a lot of religious people, UK is mostly atheist.
        Canada has a fuck-off massive province of Frenchies, UK is made up solely of Anglos and Celts.
        If there's any commonwealth country the UK is comparable to, it's Australia. Canada is just America Lite.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Canada
    lol

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    All are on thier way out. Importing so many foriegners that the traditional and local culture, ethnicity, and community is replaced by a hodge podge of minorities encouraged to practice thier own culture.

    Canada is being replaced by asians and muslims. The backwards old fashioned but friendly anglo stereotype of Canadians from 20 years back wont apply much longer.
    Large portions are asian muslim and brown now and don't retain that old canadian culture.

    New Zealand had so much land bought by foriegners its own people were struggling to get housing. All after the lord of the rings movies were filmed there. They also have the moari natives that have a stronger political influence and are anti anglo.

    Australia is really close to asia and only has in the 30 millions of people, and all Indians and South East alAsians in overpopulated asia would love to swarm them. Even 1% of asians would replace Australias entire population, so thier days are numbered.

    All gave up most gun rights which they shared for hundreds of years until the last 30 years.
    Disarm, bring in tons of foriegners, then be replaced with a new ethnicity and culture and genetics is the path all are speeding down in just the past generation.
    They will increasingly have less in common as they are replaced by new populations.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >All gave up most gun rights which they shared for hundreds of years until the last 30 years.
      Did they ever even have gun rights? IIRC the USA is one of the only places in the world to have the right to bear arms in its constitution.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      People significantly overestimate the land bought by foreigners here (NZ), the real problem is that our housing policy was based on the stupid assumption that we could have massive population growth through immigration *and* everyone could still live in a quarter-acre section to the point where our largest city is literally just miles and miles of suburban sprawl.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Firearms have always been restricted in Australia in one form or another.
      Hand guns have been heavily restricted since the 1920s.

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Yes english gentlemen carried pistols in most of the 19th century.
    Canadians had many of the same guns as Americans until last year a little harder to acquire.
    New Zealand had gun ownership of most types till a couple years ago.
    Australia had strong gun rights until the 90s, and Tasmania let you buy full auto new weapons into the 90s.
    England had started being antigun earlier and reached its big bans in the 90s.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >english gentlemen carried pistols in most of the 19th century.
      >Canadians had many of the same guns as Americans until last year a little harder to acquire.
      >New Zealand had gun ownership of most types till a couple years ago.
      >Australia had strong gun rights until the 90s, and Tasmania let you buy full auto new weapons into the 90s.
      But was it a right? Or was it just a freedom that the state hadn't yet decided to crack down on yet? Because there wasn't exactly a strong pushback from these countries to having stronger gun control imposed, and I don't recall them having to repeal certain rights in their Constitutions to pass stronger laws.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Both, the American right comes from Anglo culture, the English Bill of Rights, and the Magna Carta which didn't apply to commoners originally but applied the same concept to nobles.
        Gun rights were so strong in anglo culture they even took thier guns abroad with them against foriegn laws when traveling well into the 20th century. And anglo nations didnt punish thier citizens or extradite them for it.
        Southern US gentleman culture is essentially a modified copy of English and chivalry of a gentleman required one be able to defend themselves and ladies. A concealed pistol replaced the sword most carried in earlier time periods.

        So yes gun rights were more strongly anglo in origin than anywhere else. So it makes sense they only gave them up right before laying down and being replaced.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Even though Australia, New Zealand, etc. weren't as legally restrictive as they are now, they never had the same gun culture that the US does. Guns were always seen as tools for hunting or shooting sports, the whole "we need our guns to defend our liberty against tyrants" rhetoric never played well outside of the US.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        This, I guess it was a combination of the fact that there was never a revolution that would justify gun ownership to "defend liberty" etc and the colonial wars were mostly fought by professional soldiers for a much-briefer timespan (IIRC NZ's own attempt of having a militia battle a Maori force ended disastrously)

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Because it was never about defeating tyrants with them. It was about an honor culture that demanded and English gentleman be able to stand up for themselves, even when small statured.
        The US, Canada, and New Zealand all had very violent hostile native tribes that raided farms, murdered families, took white slaves, etc Modern politics is from the native perspective and wrongs they suffered, but the US Indian War was the most supported war in American history with more support than WW2 or any other war for a reason.
        Natives wronged or not were vicious and deadly and assassinated, murdered, robbed, and raped on a regular basis whites caught outside a settlement.
        This helped a culture of community defense that required personal owned guns at home capable of fighting dozens of armed natives if they raided the local village or farm.
        The Canadians dealt with the same thing, and the moari of New Zealand were known to be so vicious in combat the .45acp and 1911 came about specifically because they would soak up too many .38 rounds and still keep attacking.

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Being positioned between Europe and Asia gave them a lot of advantages

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    For Australia and New Zealand the obvious answer is that the point of cultural divergence was much later. British settlement of both countries took off in the 19th century, compared to the 17th century for North America. As for Canada, a large part of its Anglophone identity is "we're not Americans" and historically this meant leaning into British loyalism and taking more cultural cues from Britain.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Canada is far more similar to the US than to New Zealand, Australia or the UK

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Canada has almost nothing in common with the USA.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Canadians are repugnant

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because we are a diverse country of immigrants

Your email address will not be published.