Who is the greatest Briton alive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

They do trip up on the 'alive' category.

---

My bad. Only just missing out 😂
Seriously Lardy. When you have time, have a read about Sophia Jex-Blake. Tremendous achievements.

Blimey, it took a while for it to be pointed out that, apart from what I assume was a not wholly serious nomination for Nigella Lawson, that no woman had been mentioned and, even then, I suspect it was done so with a degree of sarcasm. I'm not going to come out with a woman nominee that I believe has a genuine chance of deservedly winning such an award either, but, as someone who believes that the really, really important issue facing us is not bloody Brexit (serious though that is), I must say that Caroline Lucas seems to be a far more deserving suggestion than Farage.

To be elected, and then re-elected twice more with increased majorities, as the only MP ever for a party that has never enjoyed the higher profile it has in some European mainland countries is an outstanding achievement which suggests that she must be a very good constituency MP as well as an effective Parliamanetarian - she manages, with ease, to do what Farage is so desperate to, but keeps on failing to :hehe:.

A few observations on some of the suggestions in this thread. I honestly don't get the David Jason nominations and, as someone who has come to appreciate Paul McCartney more and more as I've got older, I can't agree with the contention that he "was, essentially, the Beatles" - Lennon was a lazy so and so at times, but the word "genius" applied just as much to him as it did to McCartney.

I find it hard to come up with suggestions that I would regard as genuine contenders for the title of greatest Briton alive which may explain why I find it hard to recognise this brilliant country that our new, unelected, Prime Minister and Cabinet keep on referring to, but Sir David Attenborough is the person most deserving of the title I'd say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

My bad. Only just missing out ��
Seriously Lardy. When you have time, have a read about Sophia Jex-Blake. Tremendous achievements.

---

I haven't heard of her, but I will

I had assumed this thread was a tongue-in-cheek affair as it begun with a list of celebrities as nominees.

I can't think of a worthy wearer of the crown but it wouldn't be a crappy pop singer or an entertainer of any description nor a politician as they all lie for a living.

The winner is likely someone few of us have heard of who has been awarded an OBE, MBE or CBE at some point, perhaps for discovering a scientific or medical breakthrough. It could also be a person who hasn't had that recognition, maybe a surgeon whose skills saved a great many lives or a longstanding A & E consultant whose knowledge and quick thinking saved numerous souls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Well, as I said in the first place, he's promoted a single issue which began as quite obscure to national and international prominence.
The issue in question is very divisive, as we can see here, and quite abhorrent to the establishment of the day, yet it has taken on a momentum which is unlikely to be halted.
We can easily recognise the hallmarks of such individuals in history, and the contraversy they create in their own times amongst supporters of their causes and it's opponents.

How could historians record the present century in Britain and Europe without mentioning Brexit and Nigel Farrage ?

They certainly won't mention David Attenborough much , and how many people will have heard of Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn in 150 years ?

I think my suggestion is both reasoned and reasonable , and it's a great pity that a few people here can't seem to operate on that level.

I don't understand why they need to launch into this hysterical venting of their opinions about the issues Nigel Farage represents or start throwing things at the person who made an observation about his part in making history. Whether we agree or disagree with what Nigel Farage says is of no account whatever in assessing the prominence he will get in history, which isn't a bad way of describing "greatness ".

---

So not achieved anything then. Boris and his bus was the difference.

Ferne

Out of interest, where is the hysterical venting in this thread? It looks like ronniebird was hoping to stir something up and fell short.

Perhaps we have different ideas of what’s hysterical venting.
It does seem hard to hold a rational discussion here to be quite honest

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blueblade

I would add Sir Anthony Hopkins to my list of possibles

---

Would he be on your list if he was Scottish or English? No chance!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Do me a Faerber

Wouldn't want to go for a musician usually, but McCartney is a genius. Knocked out another really good album in Egypt Station this year. He was, essentially, The Beatles. Lennon did eff all for large parts. "A Day in the Life" is their best song, but mainly because of McCartney's input with the "Woke up...". Tomorrow Never Knows (a Lennon song) is another great track that owes a lot to Macca.

Yeah, Frog Chorus and Ob-La-Di and Honey Pie.... yes he churned out some shit.

But, Ram, Band on the Run, the Abbey Road Medley, Yesterday, Blackbird, Tug of War, Hey Jude. Macca is definitely Britain's greatest musical influence... he just lacks self censorship and Brits love keeping their best talent down so enjoy whittling off Frog Chorus, I Will, . His Bass lines with the Beatles were revolutionary at the time. The Bass on Hey Bulldog is brilliant for example as it is on Come Together.

Then, you have his revolutionary (for pop music) piano playing on Penny Lane. Lady Madonna, Eleanor Rigby, the man is a genius.

---

I like the song Honey Pie. I like listening to the 2018 Remastered version with ear-phones. There's sounds on it that I hadn't previously heard.

Someone not mentioned yet but without whom we would not be chatting to each other on here today; Tim Berners-Lee

David Attenborough or Peter Whittngham

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Perhaps we have different ideas of what’s hysterical venting.
It does seem hard to hold a rational discussion here to be quite honest

---

Which is why you tend to end up talking to your other accounts quite a lot.

As for this thread, I echo Pearcey's sentiments

... and back we go to the WB conspiracy !
I'm coming to the conclusion that it's unlikely here that there can be any grown up dialogue. It's very sad indeed if so few people here can manage a sensible conversation, but it does seem that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

... and back we go to the WB conspiracy !
I'm coming to the conclusion that it's unlikely here that there can be any grown up dialogue. It's very sad indeed if so few people here can manage a sensible conversation, but it does seem that way.

---

Let's be fair, can you really expect a sensible conversation when you are advocating Nigel Farage as the greatest living Briton? I would have thought that, if nothing else, the last few years has proved that none of those in the forefront of current day politics on either side of the political spectrum is remotely worthy of such an honour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Let's be fair, can you really expect a sensible conversation when you are advocating Nigel Farage as the greatest living Briton? I would have thought that, if nothing else, the last few years has proved that none of those in the forefront of current day politics on either side of the political spectrum is remotely worthy of such an honour.

---

:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

... and back we go to the WB conspiracy !
I'm coming to the conclusion that it's unlikely here that there can be any grown up dialogue. It's very sad indeed if so few people here can manage a sensible conversation, but it does seem that way.

---

Sensible😂😂😂😂 You started with the lunacy by nominating a millionaire,racist, rabble rousing, obnoxious individual 🤪🤪

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Probably Nigel Farage, and I'll tell you why.

Whether or not you like or agree with him, he's done something very unusual in the affairs of man. That is to pursue a campaign which began as very little until he achieved a result which has changed history.

Whatever the result of the current shennanigans over Brexit in the short term, the U.K. will eventually regain its independence because once 52% of a people have demanded such a course , you'll never put that genie back in the bottle.

Like Wolf Tone or William Wilberforce , he's taken an issue which is offensive to the current establishment to the point where it has gathered a critical mass and simply won't go away. Indeed, it might very well be an idea like those of the two men I've mentioned which spreads to other countries and eventually destroys the establishment of the whole EU.

Now, although I do personally support Brexit , I'm speaking objectively here as a student of History. The question isn't about whether you like or dislike the individual , but his greatness.

Why then , would I suggest that this unlikely candidate , disliked by some ,( as were the others), as the answer to the question in the OP ? The answer is that in 200 years he's likely to be the only politician and one of the few individuals that children learn about in their history lessons and read about in literature.
I would imagine that there will be quite a few statues of him and various institutions named after him by that time in the same way that there are after Wilberforce and Tone.

Please don't reject this idea because you like or dislike him, because that's really not the rationale I'm putting forward .

---

Brave post ,but I understand the theory, if you believe politics would deliver the greatest person, and his desire and drive has created Brexit and its outcome , which in turn is
dismantling parliament, and modern day politics, splitting the two main parties in two , then yes, he is up thier with Cromwell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

... and back we go to the WB conspiracy !
I'm coming to the conclusion that it's unlikely here that there can be any grown up dialogue. It's very sad indeed if so few people here can manage a sensible conversation, but it does seem that way.

---

As before,when one has little to say one reverts to child like personal attacks , they are desperately trying to get rid of you and your debate, its called bullying and harrassment.

Dont give in , any view is worth considering ,even if you dont agree it , simply debate it ,if you can that is ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Probably Nigel Farage, and I'll tell you why.

Whether or not you like or agree with him, he's done something very unusual in the affairs of man. That is to pursue a campaign which began as very little until he achieved a result which has changed history.

Whatever the result of the current shennanigans over Brexit in the short term, the U.K. will eventually regain its independence because once 52% of a people have demanded such a course , you'll never put that genie back in the bottle.

Like Wolf Tone or William Wilberforce , he's taken an issue which is offensive to the current establishment to the point where it has gathered a critical mass and simply won't go away. Indeed, it might very well be an idea like those of the two men I've mentioned which spreads to other countries and eventually destroys the establishment of the whole EU.

Now, although I do personally support Brexit , I'm speaking objectively here as a student of History. The question isn't about whether you like or dislike the individual , but his greatness.

Why then , would I suggest that this unlikely candidate , disliked by some ,( as were the others), as the answer to the question in the OP ? The answer is that in 200 years he's likely to be the only politician and one of the few individuals that children learn about in their history lessons and read about in literature.
I would imagine that there will be quite a few statues of him and various institutions named after him by that time in the same way that there are after Wilberforce and Tone.

Please don't reject this idea because you like or dislike him, because that's really not the rationale I'm putting forward .

---

Your problem here is putting him as one of the “Greatest” living Brits as opposed to influential.

Great or not is obviously going to go down to history and how things eventually pan out.

It is foolish though to dismiss him or his legacy in regards to his influence.
He has certainly achieved part of what he set out to do and for the rights or wrongs, that is certainly some achievement.

For me, the answer to the original question has to be TimBL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue

Your problem here is putting him as one of the “Greatest” living Brits as opposed to influential.

Great or not is obviously going to go down to history and how things eventually pan out.

It is foolish though to dismiss him or his legacy in regards to his influence.
He has certainly achieved part of what he set out to do and for the rights or wrongs, that is certainly some achievement.

For me, the answer to the original question has to be TimBL.

---

Aren't you really pointing out that the OP has failed to be logical (and therefore rational) by determinedly not recognizing Farage could not be deemed to have any attribute which is "great"?

S/he complains other people aren't being "rational" but fell at the start line her/himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Let's be fair, can you really expect a sensible conversation when you are advocating Nigel Farage as the greatest living Briton? I would have thought that, if nothing else, the last few years has proved that none of those in the forefront of current day politics on either side of the political spectrum is remotely worthy of such an honour.

---

Well it is sensible Bob if you understand that those who have achieved historical greatness have always had bitter opponents in their own time and been called all sorts of things by those who opposed them.
Being contraversial or even divisive in their own time has never disqualified anyone from historical greatness - quite the opposite in fact.

The point is that he's done things which will be etched into history, and that isn't diminished because some of his contemporaries don't like him - obviously a lot of people do like him, but that's equally irrelevant.

I don't warm to Kier Hardy but I couldn't and wouldn't deny that he achieved greatness because he effected the history of the country and Europe. That's the test , surely ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Well it is sensible Bob if you understand that those who have achieved historical greatness have always had bitter opponents in their own time and been called all sorts of things by those who opposed them.
Being contraversial or even divisive in their own time has never disqualified anyone from historical greatness - quite the opposite in fact.

The point is that he's done things which will be etched into history, and that isn't diminished because some of his contemporaries don't like him - obviously a lot of people do like him, but that's equally irrelevant.

I don't warm to Kier Hardy but I couldn't and wouldn't deny that he achieved greatness because he effected the history of the country and Europe. That's the test , surely ?

---

I dispute your notion that Farage has achieved "historical greatness" - what has he done exactly? Brexit has been an entirely Conservative party creation in that there have been people in that party who have been agitating for us to come out of the EU for as long as Farage has. For example, I can remember someone like Bill Cash (who I have never heard talk about else but the EU in a very long career as an MP) being derided as one of a bunch of MPs who were portrayed as loons for their objections to the Maastricht Treaty a quarter of a century ago, but, because he was working on the inside, he was more influential than Farage in bringing about David Cameron's bizarre decision to hold a straight yes or no referendum.

I'd also say various newspaper proprietors had more to do with Leave winning than Farage did with the constant drip, drip of anti EU and/or anti immigration stories over a period of decades being instrumental in changing enough people's opinions to create a situation where Leave could win.

Farage was influential to the extent that he became the public face of a one issue party which did well enough to win an occasional election on a protest vote, but Brexit didn't come about because of one man - claiming that it did is just rewriting history while pandering to an already enormous ego.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Probably Nigel Farage, and I'll tell you why.

Whether or not you like or agree with him, he's done something very unusual in the affairs of man. That is to pursue a campaign which began as very little until he achieved a result which has changed history.

Whatever the result of the current shennanigans over Brexit in the short term, the U.K. will eventually regain its independence because once 52% of a people have demanded such a course , you'll never put that genie back in the bottle.

Like Wolf Tone or William Wilberforce , he's taken an issue which is offensive to the current establishment to the point where it has gathered a critical mass and simply won't go away. Indeed, it might very well be an idea like those of the two men I've mentioned which spreads to other countries and eventually destroys the establishment of the whole EU.

Now, although I do personally support Brexit , I'm speaking objectively here as a student of History. The question isn't about whether you like or dislike the individual , but his greatness.

Why then , would I suggest that this unlikely candidate , disliked by some ,( as were the others), as the answer to the question in the OP ? The answer is that in 200 years he's likely to be the only politician and one of the few individuals that children learn about in their history lessons and read about in literature.
I would imagine that there will be quite a few statues of him and various institutions named after him by that time in the same way that there are after Wilberforce and Tone.

Please don't reject this idea because you like or dislike him, because that's really not the rationale I'm putting forward .

---

Using that logic Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin are greats

Well obviously they are, as is Napoleon and the Emporer Nero. Some people seem to think you've got to like people to regard them as historically significant, but History is neutral in this regard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

I dispute your notion that Farage has achieved "historical greatness" - what has he done exactly? Brexit has been an entirely Conservative party creation in that there have been people in that party who have been agitating for us to come out of the EU for as long as Farage has. For example, I can remember someone like Bill Cash (who I have never heard talk about else but the EU in a very long career as an MP) being derided as one of a bunch of MPs who were portrayed as loons for their objections to the Maastricht Treaty a quarter of a century ago, but, because he was working on the inside, he was more influential than Farage in bringing about David Cameron's bizarre decision to hold a straight yes or no referendum.

I'd also say various newspaper proprietors had more to do with Leave winning than Farage did with the constant drip, drip of anti EU and/or anti immigration stories over a period of decades being instrumental in changing enough people's opinions to create a situation where Leave could win.

Farage was influential to the extent that he became the public face of a one issue party which did well enough to win an occasional election on a protest vote, but Brexit didn't come about because of one man - claiming that it did is just rewriting history while pandering to an already enormous ego.

---

It just shows how wrong I can be Bob: here was I thinking "Our Nige" was the biggest embarrassment to eminate from these islands in recent times; and an utter fool to boot!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Well obviously they are, as is Napoleon and the Emporer Nero. Some people seem to think you've got to like people to regard them as historically significant, but History is neutral in this regard.

---

Historically significant and great are not the same thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Well obviously they are, as is Napoleon and the Emporer Nero. Some people seem to think you've got to like people to regard them as historically significant, but History is neutral in this regard.

---

Well done Sir Jim! I think you've been honest enough to finally nail your colours to the mast in declaring Hitler to have been "great". The word "great" usually denotes a perception of "size" or of "positivity": Surely neither of these can apply to Adolf? And in any case, he only had one testacle so he obviously didn't have great balls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

I dispute your notion that Farage has achieved "historical greatness" - what has he done exactly? Brexit has been an entirely Conservative party creation in that there have been people in that party who have been agitating for us to come out of the EU for as long as Farage has. For example, I can remember someone like Bill Cash (who I have never heard talk about else but the EU in a very long career as an MP) being derided as one of a bunch of MPs who were portrayed as loons for their objections to the Maastricht Treaty a quarter of a century ago, but, because he was working on the inside, he was more influential than Farage in bringing about David Cameron's bizarre decision to hold a straight yes or no referendum.

I'd also say various newspaper proprietors had more to do with Leave winning than Farage did with the constant drip, drip of anti EU and/or anti immigration stories over a period of decades being instrumental in changing enough people's opinions to create a situation where Leave could win.

Farage was influential to the extent that he became the public face of a one issue party which did well enough to win an occasional election on a protest vote, but Brexit didn't come about because of one man - claiming that it did is just rewriting history while pandering to an already enormous ego.

---

Well of course you may dispute it, and you may disagree . You might very well be right because only time will tell.
As I said to the previous poster, History is neutral so it takes no political or personal view, and it's often somewhat selective.

William Wilberforce didn't single handedly abolish slavery but he's the one that's remembered for it because he was the figurehead of the movement.

I'ts only a bit of fun, and I'm merely responding to the OP by suggesting a present day character who ticks all the boxes to be recorded in History as a great man. As it happens I'd probably disagree with you about his merits or otherwise , but that's entirely beside the point.
You mention Bill Cash, but you answer your own question by saying that no one talks about him in the present day, and most of the members of this particular board wouldn't have even heard of him.
I mentioned Oliver Cromwell ,and half the country felt so negative toward him that they went to war over it, yet I doubt that many here haven't heard of him all these centuries later.

I don't know why we're finding it so hard to separate the question of someone's significance in history , ( which is as near as we can get to defining greatness), from whether or not we like them .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Well done Sir Jim! I think you've been honest enough to finally nail your colours to the mast in declaring Hitler to have been "great". The word "great" usually denotes a perception of "size" or of "positivity": Surely neither of these can apply to Adolf? And in any case, he only had one testacle so he obviously didn't have great balls.

---

And thank you for completing the circle of ignorance ! I've been trying to explain that assessing someone as an historically great figure has nothing to do with whether you like them, and you have concluded that if I regard Hitler as a great figure in history I must like him !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

And thank you for completing the circle of ignorance ! I've been trying to explain that assessing someone as an historically great figure has nothing to do with whether you like them, and you have concluded that if I regard Hitler as a great figure in history I must like him !

---

Oh "ignorant" is a tad unfair surely Sir Jim! I was just thinking the name Fred West might be familiar to many on this board and surely he has cemented his name in history. But would you then describe him as "great"? Maybe in Nigel's case you were confusing infamy with greatness. I can understand that, it's a simple mistake to make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

Using that logic Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin are greats

---

Exactly.

Notoriety is not greatness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Oh "ignorant" is a tad unfair surely Sir Jim! I was just thinking the name Fred West might be familiar to many on this board and surely he has cemented his name in history. But would you then describe him as "great"? Maybe in Nigel's case you were confusing infamy with greatness. I can understand that, it's a simple mistake to make.

---

RB is clearly unable to recognise a logical argument that negates what s/he has advocated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

Using that logic Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin are greats

---

They probably could’ve been if it wasn’t for that little thing called mass homicide.

Can’t believe there is justification for a cretin like Farage in this thread who is more suited to a bombardier drink advert dressed in armour than politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Oh "ignorant" is a tad unfair surely Sir Jim! I was just thinking the name Fred West might be familiar to many on this board and surely he has cemented his name in history. But would you then describe him as "great"? Maybe in Nigel's case you were confusing infamy with greatness. I can understand that, it's a simple mistake to make.

---

Well you're right that historical significance and greatness aren't the same thing, and there are different applications to the word "great", but when we talk of great men we usually define that in terms of the longevity of their fame,( or infamy) and the lasting effect of their lives upon the course of history.
In fact you choose a poor example in Fred West because no one except perhaps particularly learned criminologists will have heard of him in 50 years - any more than we remember Victorian murderers. Fred West killed some people, but didn't effect history.

Napoleon was regarded in his time and for a while afterwards as badly as Hitler is today - a cruel genocidal maniac who wanted to invade and subdue half the world, yet at this point he is generally regarded as a great man because the rights and wrongs of his actions and the opinions of those who liked and disliked him have passed into the mists of time and been forgotten.

I'm afraid to tell you that the same will happen with Hitler too. Future generations will look at what he did and didn't do, and pass very quickly over his inhumanity, which will not seem tangible to them. As I said earlier, History is neutral you see.

By the way, I hope you don't mind me asking, but didn't you used to post as Viscount Jackie Pallow on the Norfolk Widfowlers Message Board ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Well you're right that historical significance and greatness aren't the same thing, and there are different applications to the word "great", but when we talk of great men we usually define that in terms of the longevity of their fame,( or infamy) and the lasting effect of their lives upon the course of history.
In fact you choose a poor example in Fred West because no one except perhaps particularly learned criminologists will have heard of him in 50 years - any more than we remember Victorian murderers. Fred West killed some people, but didn't effect history.

Napoleon was regarded in his time and for a while afterwards as badly as Hitler is today - a cruel genocidal maniac who wanted to invade and subdue half the world, yet at this point he is generally regarded as a great man because the rights and wrongs of his actions and the opinions of those who liked and disliked him have passed into the mists of time and been forgotten.

I'm afraid to tell you that the same will happen with Hitler too. Future generations will look at what he did and didn't do, and pass very quickly over his inhumanity, which will not seem tangible to them. As I said earlier, History is neutral you see.

By the way, I hope you don't mind me asking, but didn't you used to post as Viscount Jackie Pallow on the Norfolk Widfowlers Message Board ?

---

Yes, well spotted Sir Jim, Jackie here. History is never neutral: chronology is. You may be wrong about Fred in 50 years; many people will recall the exploits of Jack the Ripper without being contemporaries. I would argue that Fred West certainly affected the personal history of some unfortunate families in the Gloucester area.

This is a damn good question!!.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

I'm afraid to tell you that the same will happen with Hitler too. Future generations will look at what he did and didn't do, and pass very quickly over his inhumanity, which will not seem tangible to them. As I said earlier, History is neutral you see.

---

I was right in my first ever response to you. I have been wasting my time.

You are clearly a WUM with crumble for brains. It's idiots like you that propagate BS without even having the mental acuity to realize you're doing it. Hitler was, is and always will be reviled by any sane human. End of.

BTW I'm blocking you. You're a twerp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by az city

I was right in my first ever response to you. I have been wasting my time.

You are clearly a WUM with crumble for brains. It's idiots like you that propagate BS without even having the mental acuity to realize you're doing it. Hitler was, is and always will be reviled by any sane human. End of.

BTW I'm blocking you. You're a twerp.

---

Remarkable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Remarkable

---

But correct :thumbup: