Just received via email, from Geoff:

"I totally disagree with what you are saying, could you tell me of an association that I could join to oppose what you are doing? The reason we didn't go metric when Europe was metric was sheer arrogance on our behalf, and it was the same arrogance that made us drive on the left. G C"

Comments and analysis, please.

Comment: there are people who support metrication.

Analysis: he's right.

drive on the left?
europe?

i expected some guff about L.S.D. too!

Have a think why someone would email an association in order to ask for details about an opposing association...


HUMAN SPAM!

Tell you what I would do - send an email back with just a link to a european neo-nazi organisation.

I suppose that the EU ordering us to adopt "their" metric system isn't arrogance then?

As for driving on the left, it's simply that it became convention to do so in this country, just as driving on the right became the custom in some other parts of the world. Some countries have swapped sides -- Sweden did so in 1967, for example.

I've driven all four combinations of LHD and RHD vehicles on the left and right, and have problem with either side. The problem with Britain converting now would be the horrendous expense and logistical problems caused by the changeover. Unless Northern Ireland were treated differently, it would also need to be coordinated with the Republic of Ireland.

Sorry, I'm in too much of a hurry to hit post. I meant to say "I have NO problem driving on either side."

re (Geoff); "'I totally disagree with what you are saying, could you tell me of an association that I could join to oppose what you are doing? The reason we didn't go metric when Europe was metric was sheer arrogance on our behalf, and it was the same arrogance that made us drive on the left. G C'

Comments and analysis, please"


REPLY: Has he heard of the 'mirror principle'?

<<
The reason we didn't go metric when Europe was metric
>>


he last four words imply that Europe is no longer metric?

<<
I totally disagree with what you are saying, could you tell me of an association that I could join to oppose what you are doing? The reason we didn't go metric when Europe was metric was sheer arrogance on our behalf, and it was the same arrogance that made us drive on the left.
>>

Firstly, a correction - the phrase "when Europe" shoudl read "when the rest of Europe".

I agree with the section about Britian not going metric when the rest of Europe went metric. Most of Britain's neighbours went metric in the nineteenth century, with Denmark being the last Western European country (other than the Untierd Kingdom) to adopt the metric system in 1904.

As regards driving on the left - historically everybody drove on the left - it meant that you could mount you horse from the pavement without your sword getting in the way. The French revolutionaries introduced driving on the right as a matter of definance and for various reasons that stuck in all the countries that Napoleon had invaded. The only real advantage that I can see of driving on the right is that 90% of the population will be able to use their stronger (right) arm to change gear. I do not however believe that this is justification for spending the millions needed to change the side of teh road on which we drive.

Surely, is it not better to use the stronger arm for holding the steering wheel steady while changing gear?

"The only real advantage that I can see of driving on the right is that 90% of the population will be able to use their stronger (right) arm to change gear"

To be perfectly honest - I prefer having my strongest arm constantly fixed on my steering wheel. I've heard reports that for the majority (ie rh people) it is safer to have control of the steering than it is to have an over-perfect gear change. Perhaps this is one reason why we have one of the best safety/road records around whereas those mad italians keep bumping into each other ;)

I don't think it really makes that much difference, as people soon get used to changing gear with the other hand, just as they can adapt from column change to floor shift.

If the majority of Brits and Europeans didn't have such an aversion to automatic transmission, it really wouldn't matter so much anyway.

SteveH wrote

<<
Perhaps this is one reason why we have one of the best safety/road records around whereas those mad italians keep bumping into each other ;)
>>

Having spent almost a year in Italy and a year and a half in Germany, (both of which drive on the right), I can assure you that the problem in Italy is much more than whether the law says "Drive on the left" or "Drive on the right".

"If the majority of Brits and Europeans didn't have such an aversion to automatic transmission, it really wouldn't matter so much anyway"

With a gear change the art of driving becomes much more interesting. Even the yanks wouldn't put auto transmission in their top roadsters (well some anyway)

I wonder whether the preference for auto-boxes comes from the mundane days where everyone trudged along their motorways at 55mph and the thrill of "driving" rather than "motoring" hasn't seeped into the american psychie yet?

"I totally disagree with what you are saying, could you tell me of an association that I could join to oppose what you are doing? The reason we didn't go metric when Europe was metric was sheer arrogance on our behalf, and it was the same arrogance that made us drive on the left."

The reason we didn't go metric with the rest of Europe was because we were TOO DEMOCRATUIC!!!! We're BETTER than Europe, NOT worse, BETTER. Europe had nothing but dictatorships and absolute monarchies (we haven't had an absolute monarchy since 1215), and metrication was all in the post Sir Robert Walpole era.

Agreed, the electorate was rather limited, but at least some people could have a say in the decision making process besides the king and the landed gentry. (The introduction of the Prime Minister meant that it was no longer the King who chose his ministers, but an MP.)

We were the first to decide upon which side of the road to drive on, so it was nothing to do with OUR arrogance not to drive on the same side as Europe - rather European arrogance.

re (Frederick Rodriguez): "we haven't had an absolute monarchy since 1215..."

REPLY: Well, apart from James II maybe (and his sidekick 'Hanging' Judge Jeffreys), who was a virtual dictator from 1685 to 1688. But then we had the Glorious Revolution, William of Orange came over, and we got our new Constitution with the Declaration and Bill of Rights 1688-9 (this, er, is the one the European Union is currently trying to abolish and replace with its own Constitution)

<<
William of Orange came over
>>

It is worth noting that William of Orange was Dutch and that 130 years later the Netherlands became teh first European country to adopt the metric system after Napoleon "suspended" the use of metres. kilograms etc in favour of the pied metrique (1/3 m) and the livre metrique (500g).

About 150 years after the Dutch went metric, the British started their metrication program, but have not yet completed it.

Didn't go down well when James II got for some reason too totalitarian did it? Because it was a bit of an alien concept for us.

Then again, I don't blame him for disagreeing with anti-Catholic agenda of MPs and Peers - for obvious reasons.

"Declaration and Bill of Rights 1688-9 (this, er, is the one the European Union is currently trying to abolish and replace with its own Constitution)"

Tosh.

What?

That bloke on "The Bill"

"Lyons" isn't it?