Gwyneth Paltrow: "The British Are More Intelligent And Civilized Than The Americans"...
Agence France-Presse | Posted December 2, 2006 01:04 PM
Oscar-winning US actress Gwyneth Paltrow feels dinner talk is far more interesting in her adopted homeland Britain than back in her native country.
"I love the English lifestyle, it's not as capitalistic as America. People don't talk about work and money, they talk about interesting things at dinner," she told "NS", the weekend magazine supplement of daily Portuguese newspaper Diario de Noticias on Saturday.
Uh-oh. I'm not sure there is anything I can say on this that wouldn't get me in trouble with somebody somewhere.
I am unabashed anglophile myself. I have been since I was ten. The history, the cities, the arts, all of it. But Gwynn seems to be unaware of England's dark underbelly. The NHS, the lager louts and binge drinkers, the failing education system, the still existent slums and poverty, the segregation of immigrants from natives, the still only slightly veiled class system etc.
I'm also guessing Gwynn hasn't spent to much time down the pub or in the football terraces, not to mention council flats.
Yes, the English on the whole are sophisticated, intelligent (AND VERY CAPITALISTIC GWYNN)and worldly people. Just as many Americans are. And just as there are a large number of illiterate, moronic, backwards knuckledraggers in America, proportionally there are probably just as many roaming the streets of Burmondsey, York, Manchester, London and Liverpool.
IT is true in my opinion that there is a certain civility and formality that I find appealing in Europe and England that I find a distinct lack of here so I will agree with her there. But I am not so sure I would paint the comparison with such a broad brush.
Every country has its intellectually inclined people and its share of Darwin Award Finalists. Trust me, England has plenty of candidates.
Is Bush the worst president ever?
This interesting article in the Washington Post claims he is only the 5th worst. I disagree with him and would move Bush to replace Madison. His reasoning and POV on why Madison engaged in the war of 1812 is way off base.