Britain: Myths and Reality

Nothing at all.
We have progressed in every way. Many of the 'problems' we see today that people would argue we did not see then are merely the result of the changing world; higher populations tend to cause higher crime rates in absolute terms, society is more liberal now, and so on and so forth.

Rather than yearn for the past we should be looking to, and working to forge, a better future. To yearn for the past betrays those who helped make the world better, because by its very nature it rejects innovation and progress.

At Xmas I receive books on railways / rail related topics - this year being no exception.
It's nostalgic to see how 'Great Brtain's' transport infrastructure used to be like in the 1940/50/60's, with stations and lines all over the place. It is also a reminder of the pollution, filth and poverty that made up middle Britain.

As it happens, someone in the other place has just posted this from George Macdonald Fraser in the Daily Mail:

This is highly relevant to the topic.  Anyone care to comment?

I believe it was only in the past few decades that homosexuality and sodomy were legalised.
And I find the idea that there were no worries about race to be difficult to believe.

Going back to that by Fraser, the morality matter is opinion - does he, for example, feel that discrimination is immoral? If he does then he should be praising the moral progress in acceptance of other sexualities, races, cultures etc. - as is the bit about standards of decency. Sportsmanship too is subjective; politeness less so, and I find that most people I know are generally very courteous and well-mannered. Respect for the law is a tricky one; what do we judge it by? The crime rate? If so, then absolute or relative? And how do we take into account any new laws since then (logically, the more laws there are, the higher the crime rate, as there are fewer things you can do that aren't a crime)?
Family values: aside from the obvious subjectivity of this, I would also ask which family values he meant. Spending time with your family, perhaps? Then what if your parents are abusive or oppressive? What if you don't share the same interests? And so on.
Politics, education and religion; the first and last points are subjective; the second point may have some justification, given that earlier generations were learning calculus at the age of 16 (I have to wait until sixth form, or 17, although I have in fact already studied some aspects with my teachers during lunchtimes - it is merely a matter of whether or not you wish to make the effort). In some ways we have probably improved.

What are hang-ups? :S

And what taboos? What restrictions? What oppressions? And how is the debt worse when the standard of living has improved also? And how do all these compare to his days - what taboos, restrictions, oppressions and debts did his generation have?

And I would argue that we don't subject to pressure; we subject to basic morality which teaches us that all humans are equal. I ask what is inherently wrong with political correctness, and I protest strongly against the insults he then lays against modern society!

And, as for the last point, though I disagree with the image he gives of our political leaders, I would ask: were things any different for his generation? Of course not.

I'd think he was selfish. I'll remind you, sir, that embryos do not get the luxury of making that choice.

Mind you, I'm selfish - I refuse to donate my organs. They're mine as far as I'm concerned, dead or otherwise.