108
by soul_rancher_Archive
upon initial examination, there seems to be no good reason for a skip like myself to choose either. but i should at least be scientific (and simultaneously parochial) about this:
history:
poms: britain creates a dumping ground colony for its overcrowded prisons, and subsequently removes a great amount of natural resources. then, eventually recognizes australia as a sovereign state, yet continues to receive trade benefits through her majesty. sent thousands of aussie soldiers to be cannon fodder at gallipoli, ypres, the somme and north africa. then tested a substantial number of nuclear devices in the desert near maralinga, without understanding that a vast tract of seemingly empty land was in fact home for almost 500 people. 0 points
yanks: did not dump criminals on australian shores. pretty much stepped into the role of australia's big bro after wwii, and erected a single communications and tracking post at pine gap. did not detonate any atomic devices. aside from trying to externally determine australia's foreign policy in respect to afghanistan, iraq and vietnam, haven't sent too many aussies to their death. 1 point
culture:
most of australia's past has been spent trying to define a unique australian culture as distinct from the pervasive influence of both british and american culture. this has been a somewhat futile pursuit, with minor, yet notable exceptions. australians seem to embrace the cultural exports of both the us and britain as part of our own culture. one point each.
spoken english:
poms: for my money, there is nothing more disappointing than a good looking brit girl, for she will inevitably open her mouth and produce a sound not unlike pulling a cat across a chainsaw. cockneys, midlanders, mankies, geordies...ugly, ugly, ugly. scots accents (particularly the deeply inflected glaswegian) are more my idea of heaven, but it would certainly be inappropriate to include this under the hyponym 'british'. 0 points
yanks: despite the existence of many objectionable american accents, on the whole i prefer listening to a midwestern american accent than any british accent. though the inflections can be quite strong, the delivery of words is generally less clipped and the vocalisations are given slightly more time. it's pretty much ny/nj accents that raise my ire. 1 point
sports:
for a nation of 20 million people, australians have never considered british sportspeople or teams a challenge. americans are always a good challenge, and it seems a significant achievement to beat an american team in a sport that is considered noteworthy in the us. yanks 1 point.
politics (since 1980):
poms: thatcher, major, blair. all figures worthy of disdain, but in australian eyes, harmless. 1 pont.
yanks: reagan, bush I, clinton, bush II. you guys were dopey enough to vote his cokehead snotbrained son in. twice. nuff said. -1 point.
as tourists:
there is nothing that makes a saturday night more worthwhile than a glassing from a pisshead brit backpacker. lucky i avoid bondi like the plague. "the ugly american" (big black) could well be paraphrased to "the ugly lancastrian" or similar. whilst i have met a number of american tourists who seem to treat our nation as a curiosity or a novelty, they are generally less noticably antisocial. except when their boats dock in our ports. but that's why we set kings cross up for them. whores aplenty, and not a single bar that any self-respecting aussie would be caught dead in. yanks 1, poms 0.
music:
where is britain's soul music? is it pop? yuk! oh well, i suppose they gave us gang of four...
yanks 2, brits 0.5
totals:
yanks: 6 points
poms: 2.5 points
yanks win tonight folks. poms, lift yer game. and as for aussies, we know we've got the best of all worlds. even though shellac (and a million other decent bands) will never tour here again.
Toby Baldwin
Soul Ranch Leichhardt
), but the film was shot in the UK and used a mostly British crew. It was also based on a novel by a Brit.