It is a seldom-recognised fact that the British are world leaders in the art of grumbling. By a long margin, it is our most popular national pastime. In fact, if grumbling was an Olympic sport (or perhaps synchronised grumbling) then it would be British competitors taking gold, silver and bronze. The other nations do not stand a chance.
And I can find no better example of this kind of world-class, cutting-edge grumbling than this article by Philip Johnston:
Do you ever feel like Howard Beale, the character played by Peter Finch in the film Network? He was a news presenter on American TV who became so frustrated at the refusal of anyone to listen to reason that he invited viewers to open their windows and yell into the streets: “I am as mad as hell and I am not going to take it any more.”
Such conspicuous expressions of indignation are more acceptable in America than they are here. When we are as mad as hell, the most forceful manifestation of our emotions tends to be a resigned shrug or a heavy sigh. Understatement is one of our endearing national characteristics; but it also means we can more easily be taken for a ride.
And that is why we lead the world in grumbling. We have the ideal training programme.
Our predisposition to react benignly to developments that would have other people taking to the streets is to be applauded. But this quintessential mildness relies on governments, local councils and others who can interfere in our lives to do so only when it is absolutely necessary, and then in a fair and balanced way. The current Government is no longer able to identify this fulcrum. It brings in legislation because it believes that its very function is to pour forth a cascade of new laws each year, even when there is no demand for them.
Suggest to a minister that he might try to get through the parliamentary session without legislating and he will look at you as if you are crazy. Propose that existing laws should take effect before new ones are introduced and expect a blank stare. After all, what are politicians for if not to bring in laws? “We legislate therefore we are,” should be written on the gates of the Palace of Westminster.
But what else are politicians for? Pray tell, Mr Johnston?
For those fed up with high taxes, street crime, late and dirty trains, inane regulations, the unjustified use of fines and charges, bloody-minded parking restrictions, excessive public sector waste, preposterous European directives, multi-culturalist busybodies, useless and unaccountable council officials and six-hour waits at the local hospital’s A&E centre, a shrug and a sigh are no longer enough.
And so what? What follows from that? If Mr Johnston is proposing that our time-honoured traditions of heavy sighing, eyeball-rolling, muttering and impotent resignation are no longer sufficient grist for the national mill, then so be it, but where do we go from there?
“hello kettle, this is black pot calling….”,
So, “The British” are world leaders in grumbling? Should we ever actually send a team to the Olympics, might I be so bold as to proposed the article’s author as our team captain. I believe we should have a professional leading the squad…
mad dog,
I have been training intensively for some time 🙂
David,
I don’t know if you take steroids, but you are one athletic grumbler. Go for Gold!
I think we should all take to the streets with big guns and maybe some of those paper mache puppets which we could set fire to while singing “Hey hey Tony Blair, how many laws did you pass last year!”
Just an idea…
So, “Mustn’t Grumble” (by Chas and Dave ) is going to become the new National Anthem?
Personally, I believe the Brits have raised the art of grumbling to the level of an Olympic event;
begging the question, “Who’s Britain’s leading grumbler and does he/she qualify as an Amateur?”
Here is in the states you use carrots and sticks.
Local Politics
If the thing is a low-radar bill, about a week before the vote, send a smallish campaign finance check. The day before, call into the office (you just sent $, he’ll take the call). Express your views.
If it’s Big Profile, or non-Local (like State or Federal) this doesn’t work, unless you’ve got serious $$$. It’s much better to write a letter expressing your views, and then tell them how you’re going to publish what a philanderer they are in the local paper/ web page if they don’t play ball.
Grumbling doesn’t get crap done. Neither does protesting.
They listen to money, media & votes – in that order.
Carrots & sticks, it’s the only way to fly.
“David, I don’t know if you take steroids, but you are one athletic grumbler.”
David is much, much more than that. Didn’t you know that he eats lightning and craps thunder? 🙂
Where do we go from here? I went to Cape Town and started living. Bugger the Northern Line!
The English once executed a king for tyranny (Charles I), and forced another to flee for suspected designs of tyranny (Jacques II).
More recently they forced one to abdicate (Edward VIII) because he wanted to marry a real woman (the American Mrs Simpson), not some anaemic chinless aristocratic English horse-face like the rest of the Windsors.
Somewhere between 1688 and the twentieth century, the English became sheep. Except Churchill!
BTW, the English may be les champions olympiques at grumbling, but you are débutant amateurs at sneering and insulting!
Jacques II – who he? Did I miss a history class?
Gustave,
The next one to abdicate will probably have to do so because he wants to marry an anaemic chinless aristocratic English horse-face!
It was my understanding that it has been revealed that getting rid of Edward VIII because he wanted to marry a divorcee was only an excuse. The real reason was the Nazi sympathies of both him and more particularly the Simpson woman.
In any case he moved to France and felt so much more at home.
We didn’t always just grumble. In 1812 we actually shot one of the ‘enemy’, one Spencer Perc ival, who by all accounts was a champion ‘dick-head’ of the first water.
Then they took our guns away, the didn’t want assasination to become a habit…… He was a Tory, by the way!. and they built a church in Ealing, W5. in his memory.
ernest,
The guy who murdered Spencer Percivil was simply a nutter who ran into financial problems and blamed the prime minister. Whilst income tax was 10% at that time, and there were import duties on perhaps over 1000 articles, the country was at war. There was a major European war where a French dictator had taken over most of Europe, and the Americans, seeing an oportunity to steal Canada were being upity as well. After we defeated both France and America income tax was abolished.
Guns were still perfectly legal with very little restriction till the early 20th century when they were restricted because of what was seen at the time as a risk of communist revolution. I think there was no chance of a communist revolution in any case at that time, but that’s what happened.
Della,
Spoilsport, I was quite aware of the story – but a guy who shoots a PM can not be, or may not have been, quite as mad as they said.
By all accounts he was an extremely poor PM, and was not regarded very highly by his peers.
Funny how any hint of a revolution, armed or otherwise, is laid at the door of the communists, although ‘revolution’ was the buzzword at that time.
I still think that the banning of guns in the UK is more out of fear of revolution that out of any consideration of public safety.
To me it seems like a 19th century version of “suicide by cop”, he carries out an act that he knows is going to get him killed (by death sentence 7 days later) and then he waits for death. When someone asks “Who was the rascal who did it?” he comes forward and says “I am the unfortunate man”, because he was just hanging around waiting to get caught. This sort of thing is a great argument for legalising euthenasia of people who want to die, because then they’ll take the easy way out and not do anything so rash in their rush to death.
It wasn’t totally implausable notion at the time, it was around the time of the various Russian revolutions.
I think you’re wrong there. I don’t think they worry about that much.
I think the fear of assasination would add a new dimension to Bitish political life. It might even help to reduce the ‘smugness’ level in Westminster.
Our beloved ‘Leaders’ might pay a little more attention to their constituents, if they feared losing a bit more than their seats when making some of their more unpopular decisions, or breaking their electoral promises. It might even prevent some of this ‘knee-jerk’ legislation, which seems so popular.
You could call it ‘Democracy Noir’, that should make it popular with our leftie friends, while those on the right would be totally neutered by way of continually having wet underwear.
More seriously, when comparing the number of deaths by ‘legal’ guns, and death by illegal guns, it is hard to see the justification for the total ban that we now have.
They may not be worried about a full scale revolution, but I am sure that fear of assasination, or uprising does play a part in their thinking. Why else the draconian legislation?
Aren’t Tory politicians meant to like “wet” underwear?