BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 04:50 PM

If he was interested in a contemporary study of the behavior of Brits in crowds, he could have researched the situation where a taunted boy jumps to death. .   He didn't exactly die of "niceness".

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 04:15 PM

anti-approbation, whatever the word is. Reproval?

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 04:09 PM

I guess we don't hear about this book much because it's Darwin on (that big no-no) Social Darwinism.




The pre-Christmas human stampede that trampled a store employee to death (Best Buy?)was caused by people cutting in. That may have been an easier choice for Savage to study and prove his point.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 03:59 PM

And of course the Darwin book is available to us all for free at google books. At around page 93 he gets into it, explaining (with examples) how in societies of the most primitive sort and onward, fear of social approbation works to the common good, countering the instinct for self-preservation. Then he claims:

"As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point once being reached, there is only an artificial barrier to his sympathies being extended to the men of all nations and races."


http://books.google.com/books?id=iArG1dDytFAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Descent+of+Man#PPA134,M1

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 03:03 PM

One of the somewhat offensive ideas that runs through all this is that Americans are somehow less inclined to "queue" and wait their turn than Brits. T'ain't true.

Americans are fairly fastidious about getting, and staying, "in line", even now. It is not uncommon to see people line up, even when there is nothing to actually line up for. Maybe we have a different style, but we do it, and we we take it very seriously when people cut in.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 02:35 PM

"Right then, go on ahead of me. I'll be fine. No worries. I can just lash a couple of deck chairs together or something. Never been adverse to a little swim, good for the constitution y'know. Here, let me hand you that life preserver, madam. The deck chair raft I'm building? Certainly. Take it. I insist! It's really just a first attempt and frankly I'm a bit embarrassed at the way its come out. You'd be doing me a favor, really, taking it off my hands.
An open seat on the lifeboat? Oh, no thanks. Never really liked boats, rowing, all that. Actually, I have no idea why I even thought of crossing the ocean on this one, really not my sort of thing. No, no lifeboats for me. I'd much rather grab onto a sturdy bit of flotsam or jetsam. Nothing like the old flotsam for floating out of a shipwreck I always say."

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 02:22 PM

Historians have often speculated on the issue of exactly when the language commonly spoken by sociologists diverged from English...

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 02:00 PM

The idea that group selection might explain the evolution of altruism was first broached by Darwin himself. In The Descent of Man (1871), Darwin discussed the origin of altruistic and self-sacrificial behaviour among humans.

(Ibid.)

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:51 PM

Darwin noted altruism and was puzzled by it.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:31 PM

Oh I see it, sorry. Don't know about Darwin hisself on group selection, but google e.g. altruism marmots; stuff like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:27 PM

But, yes, I could be completely full of nonsensical bullshit, too, which is what I think the question was? Always a possibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:21 PM

Population biologists analyzing group selection (natural selection at group levels) love doing studies like this. They would generally predict altruistic behavior to protect the females of reproductive age, and would also predict altruistic behavior to favor close relatives, protecting the group's collective genetic makeup. Of course it doesn't work here because of arbitrary groupings, small sample size and retrospective analysis instead of properly designed experiments. But it just struck me that this is what the guy was hoping he could do, I think. "Culture" is an advanced overlay, compared to animal populations which are often social/societal.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:18 PM

Don't ask us to attempt the impossible, Dave!

(Heh! I'm just joking. Couldn't resist.)

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:10 PM

wrong about what?

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 12:30 PM

GUEST,Heric, said in part:

He may well still believe that he could show, with superior test design, that cultural aspects of British behavior disproportionately affected results that would have been predicted by population biologists, or somehow became a relevant factor enhancing or diminishing theoretical predictions from Darwinian modeling at the group level.

Huh? What in the world is meant here by "theoretical predictions from Darwinian modeling"?

From my reading of Darwin I've not seen anything he said about a model from which theoretical predictions of social behavior could be made.

If I'm wrong, please educate me.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 10:11 AM

Here's a little blurb from something called econonomiclogic.com which claims the study did proper regression analysis but points out that the survival differential applies only to American v. British men, not to women (or children, I assume.)

http://economiclogic.blogspot.com/2009/01/fairness-culture-and-selfish-american.html

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 09:35 AM

Ismay does not emerge with much honour.
It was his decision to reduce the number of boats, so he knew well that there were not enough as he secured a place for himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 09:26 AM

Savage's idea seems to be that Americans elbowed their way on to the lifeboats. I don't see what's particularly nice about that idea. There certainly was no evidence of it in any of the investigations that were conducted-

In point of fact, the man most conspicuously accused of elbowing hiss way onto a Titanic lifeboat was J. Bruce Ismay, the managing director of White Star Lines, and a Brit--who also was, it is said, responsible for reducing the number of lifeboats provided for in the ship's design from 48 to 16, as to allow for greater space in first class.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 07:45 AM

Heric, more info on the original report here.
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/01/who-survived-the-titanic.html

Dear moderators,
I assume it is an oversight that the lampooning of the names of young men recently killed in Afghanistan has been allowed to remain here on the forum.
I am sure it is not because Al used to be Oakville and is "known to a number of members"

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 12:48 PM

I'm beginning to think that Savage had a nice idea here that just didn't pan out as well as he had hoped, with statistical significance. It's so hard to tell when we have only journalistic tripe to work with. It would be a bad assumption that the quotes reported were accurate or in context. He was studying altruism (the lynchpin of society in animals) and the cultural (learned behavior) overlay in a crisis environment holding mixed "groups" (where the classifications are arguably arbitrary or poorly chosen.)

Although he is called a behavioral economist, this is the stuff of animal behaviorists and population biologists. The mongrel group called "Americans" had a more diverse gene pool and a formative, "adolescent" culture, while being the largest "group." Scandinavians presumably had the tightest genetic relationships, in a smaller group. The British of the day may have been suspected to be the ones with the strongest cultural rules and norms.

He may well still believe that he could show, with superior test design, that cultural aspects of British behavior disproportionately affected results that would have been predicted by population biologists, or somehow became a relevant factor enhancing or diminishing theoretical predictions from Darwinian modeling at the group level.

He did find, he says, statistically significant groupings by group size, passenger class, sex, age and fitness. It seems though, that group size, passenger class (and probably Americans communicating in the dominant language, I would guess) swamped lesser classifications, notably national culture, relegating them to statistical insignificance.

"Be British, boys" may have inspired his hypothesis and "Americans proved pushy" may have inspired newspaper editors, but all in all it is interesting reading.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,James Bateman
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 11:57 AM

Priceless bubblyrat, simply pricelss.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: bubblyrat
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 11:44 AM

Gosh !! I had no IDEA that we awful ,pioneering,road-and-hospital -building,educating,paternalistic,British had done so many dreadful things,and had cold-heartedly murdered so many hundreds of thousands,if not millions of people all over the world, in South Africa,India, (at the time the most powerful nation on Earth ??)and of course,America,where,according to Hollywood and Mel Gibson,we locked up women and children in churches,and then burned them alive !! I feel AWFUL now !! Of course, the stories that I have read recently,about the US Cavalry riding into "Red Indian " villages, and slaughtering all the women and children, even cutting off the formers' genitals, just so that the US government could get at the gold laying under the desolate,barren lands that they had previously so magnanimously permitted the "Savages" to eke out a pitiful existence on -----well, it's all LIES -----Isn't it ?? Yes ??Tell me, Al .Tell me it ain't so, please??

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 08:06 AM

Thank you, Terebus and Kieth A. I have a lot of historical tidbits, but that is a connection I don't think anyone in the US would have made. Jerk.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 07:46 AM

Sorry, Robert McKibben.
k.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 07:45 AM

Robert McKillen is another Marine killed recently in Afghanistan.
Guest Al celebrated the deaths of servicemen there when he joked about "they (soldiers) getting fewer as the weeks go by."

The families of these fallen may visit this forum.
I am surely not the only member to find this crowing over the names of fallen soldiers vile and offensive.

I hope it is soon removed.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,Robert McKibben
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 07:16 AM

Teribus, check your facts before ranting. Thank you.

---

Al, you're trolling for trouble - which means you're no longer welcome to post in this thread. If you post as a guest, you are expected to be on your best behavior - and to use a consistent name every time you post.
-Joe Offer, Forum Moderator-

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Megan L
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 06:11 AM

I once did a childrens talk called lucky tickets on a board i had a lottery ticket a raffle ticket and a copy of a ticket from the Titanic. Most of the children and adults chose either the lottery or raffle ticket. The luckiest ticket of the three however belonged to someone who had disembarked the ship at I think it was Le Harve. I then went on to tell them of some of the amazing tales of courage love and sacrifice that happened on that tragic night.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 05:47 AM

Interesting Guest Al:

Benjamin Reddy, John Thorton, David Marsh and Ben Whatley

All Royal Marines all killed on active duty in Afghanistan.

Illustrates your grip on reality perfectly as you direct me to contact them to corroborate your rather fanciful take on things.

So far on this thread, as has been the case with your contributions on others, everything that you have said has been shot to pieces, which is not surprising, and certainly no accomplishment, as most of what you spew out is firmly based on bigotry and ignorance that is astounding in one of your age.

Part of nothing, accomplished nothing, a completely forgettable non-entity is what you are Guest Al and while you wallow about in your mediocrity be comforted by this thought - "You could not at any point in your entire existence ever be considered fit to lick the boots of the young men you mentioned".

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Stu
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 04:52 AM

Guest A1 - typical of the trolling poltroons that appear more and more common on this board these days. Doesn't even have the guts to answer questions addressed directly to him, which makes you wonder if his obvious hatred of all things British has robbed him of the ability to debate or discuss.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,Al
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 03:52 AM

Teribus, my facts and figures can be confirmed. Check with Lance Corporal Ben Whatley.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: M.Ted
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 03:11 AM

Heric--In point of fact, eighteen of the engineers did survive--in fact five of the twelve on Lifeboat number one were from the engineering section. Make of it what you will.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 12:36 PM

A couple of other minor points Guest Al relating to this pearl you cast before us:

"India was the richest country on earth until the time of British invasion in the early 17th Century."

Point 1 - Fairly obvious but anyone who has even a rudimentary knowledge of history could tell you that prior to the arrival of the British, the Portuguese, the French and the Dutch - There was no such country as India, so it could hardly have been the richest could it?? India was used to describe the land mass that made up the sub-continent. The sub-continent itself consisted of a number of independent states, that the various European powers traded with.

Point 2 - When exactly was this British "invasion" of India Guest Al?? And what did the British use to carry out this "invasion"?? Taking into account that there were roughly 350 million people living on the sub-continent of India at the time and that the British Army at the height of Queen Victoria's power consisted of only 120,000 men - their not so numerous fore-fathers must have been real hard bastards Eh?? Maybe you should look up the history of a London trading House called "The Honourable East India Company" Guest Al, established by Royal Charter on 31st December 1600, by Queen Elizabeth I, became defunct in 1858 (After the Indian Mutiny) and formally dissolved in 1873.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 05:35 AM

Al, is it possible you are confusing the people of India with the Lakota Sioux.
Some people used to call them Indians.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 05:10 AM

On the other hand Guest Al you could try reading Niall Ferguson, Professor of International history at Harvard University, Senior Research Fellow at Jesus College, Oxford University and Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

His take on things is somewhat different to your own.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Stu
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 04:53 AM

"Those in 3rd class were locked in to their quarters by the British crew."

Evidence for this (and Leonardo de Caprio rattling gates in the film doesn't count)?

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Rowan
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 01:40 AM

Thanks, Art. That's why I used the quotation marks. My recollection was that those words were actually used and formed part of a group of features of that war that were regarded as 'innovative'; "total war" (meaning denial of resources to civilians as well as to combatants), reliance on railways and their targeted destruction were others mentioned in the same way by Burns' film.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 12:42 AM

Rowen, the Confederate Army had some pretty horrendous prisoner of war camps, of which Andersonville is certainly the best known. Many of the Union Army POW camps were not much (if any) better. Although starvation was rarely an issue in the north, Southern soldiers were unready for northern winters and the winter clothing provided to them was, at best, inadequate. However, concentration camps, in the sense of 'concentrating' noncombatants for significant periods of time, were not a feature of the American Civil War.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Rowan
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 10:48 PM

South Africa, where the British invented the Concentration camps and murdered 40 000 innocent women and children

Pardon the thread drift, but I seem to recall Ken Burns' film of the (US) Civil War portraying the Confederate Army/Administration as having established the "first concentration camp"; apart from the dates (not being a US citizen I've had much less exposure to salient myths/folklore/real historical facts than US 'catters), which I gather were around 1864, I can't present details, but I do recall Burns making the assertion.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: heric
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 07:16 PM

Hey the section titled CREW, EMPLOYEES, AND SERVANTS points towards the answer on the discrepancies between your numbers and the Savage declaration that "crew" survived disproportionately by manipulation. Item 2, for example, says that 70% of the "sailors" survived. 100% of engineers perished (item 4.)

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 07:11 PM

C'mon, Al - if that were true, then there wouldn't have been a higher survival rate among 3rd class women than 1st class men.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,Al
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 07:00 PM

Those in 3rd class were locked in to their quarters by the British crew.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: M.Ted
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 05:53 PM

There were 113 Irish in 3rd class, not counted as British, who numbered 120, but even added together, they were less than a third of the total 708. There were actually more Scandinavians than Irish--24 Norwegians, 104 Swedes, and 59 Finns. There were also a surprising number of Syrians, 79, and they had a significantly higher survival rate than the others.

Pity the poor Bulgarians, 33 passengers, but none survived. Check Demographics of Passengers .

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Hrothgar
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 05:28 PM

"... Sorry about all the French, when we're discussing an almost entirely English-speaking group..."

No, many of them were Amerticans.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,Al
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 03:16 PM

No teribus, I stand by my facts. Contact John Thornton and David Marsh for confirmation.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: PoppaGator
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 01:23 PM

"Only about a quarter of those in third class survived--many of those were probably neither British nor American-"

I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of those in steerage who were neither British nor American were Irish, and at that time, like it or not, the Irish were under British rule. I wonder whether they would have been classified as "British" in the context of these studies?

My paternal grandparents had left the farm in County Mayo a couple of years earlier and moved to Liverpool in order to work and earn enough money to continue traveling on to the US. Family legend has it that they were booked on the Titanic (in second class), but my Aunt Peg (then an infant and still their only child) was seriously ill ~ enough to postpone the trip.

Whether that detail is true or not, I know for a fact that they DID arrive in New York on a White Star Line ship (same company as the Titanic), only a month or so after the Titanic had sunk.

All members of my extended family traveled across the ocean in second-class steamship accommodations. Each could have crossed over sooner on steerage (third), since less money would have been needed, but they all spent the extra time working and saving in Liverpool out of fear (or, at least, caution).

They knew people who had been turned back at Ellis Island, which is where third-class foreign passengers were processed into the US. Second-class passengers stayed on board when the ship docked at Ellis, and then disembarked an hour or so later on the west side of Manhattan, where they could enter the US much more easily ~ provided that they were met at the dock by a resident US "sponsor."

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 12:47 PM

I'm afraid Guest Al that India's poistion in the world today rather stands at odds to your fairytale.

Your "silent-movie-like" portrayal of Great Britain as the vile-villain of the piece is a bit of a myth when you go into detail.

India is poised to become one of the great world powers within the course of the next few decades. That is in part due to the investment made in India by Great Britain during the days of the Raj.

Give you some examples:

- Land under irrigation before the British arrived 5%
- Land under irrigation when the British left 25%
- Railways
- Coal mining
- Iron Foundaries
- Manufacturing Industries

All built and established during the Raj

India may well eclipse even China in Super power status Guest Al. Do you know why? Because far far more of them speak English as a second language.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Stu
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 12:45 PM

Sorry A1 - do you still want me to top myself for all the sins of the British?

Go on old son, don't jib out on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: GUEST,Al
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 12:25 PM

No Teribus, I can't agree with you on any of those points. Modern images of India often show poverty and lack of development, India was the richest country on earth until the time of British invasion in the early 17th Century.

Hope your well, how is Benjamin Reddy mate ?

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 11:23 AM

Here's a poem by C. Fox Smith which commemorates the Birkenhead sinking that Terribus referenced:

The Loss Of The Birkenhead

Silent they stood upon that stranded wreck
    Fast on a hidden shoal,
Drawn up in line upon the leaning deck
    For their last muster-roll.
There was no wailing heard of wild affright,
    No cry of those who drown:
All silent, in the darkness of the night,
    The Birkenhead went down.

Many there were that hour who sank below,
    Drown'd in the dark cold brine,
Who ne'er had tried their worth against the foe,
    Nor stood in battle-line.
But bravely, truly, as in front of fight,
    Each won a hero's crown,
When the staunch Birkenhead at dead of night
    Off Danger Point went down.

Where lives the man dare say that all in vain
    Those hero lives were spent?
Ever their proud example shall remain
    A deathless monument.
Ever the tale of sacrifice shall shine
    In England's long renown,
How, strong and still, drawn up in steadfast line,
    Five hundred souls went down.

Notes:

From THE FOREMOST TRAIL, by Cicely Fox Smith, published by Sampson Low, Marston & Co., London, UK, © 1899, pp. 30-31.

The "Birkenhead" was a British iron, paddle-wheel frigate of 1400 tons. On the 26th February, 1852, she struck a submerged rock off Danger Point, South Africa. The "Birkenhead" has secured a place in history due to the gallantry of her soldiers, who, in the face of great danger, allowed the women and children to escape in the boats before trying to save themselves. In the tragedy 445 People lost their lives. 193 people, including all the women and children, survived. This disaster is seen as the start of the naval tradition of "Women and Children First."

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Brits on Titanic die of niceness
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 11:06 AM

In the interests of historical accuracy, I should note that the Second Boer War and the Philippine "Insurrection" covered almost exactly the same period of time, 1899-1902 (the war in the Philippines began in February, that in the Transvaal in October, but they ended 5 days apart). There is some question in both cases as to when the camps opened, and when they transitioned from places to keep civilians out of the line of fire to breeding grounds for disease. The credit for the first "modern" use of such facilities probably goes to the US for the internment of Indian families on reservations so their men would quit fighting, in the 1880 and early 1890s. (Earlier reservations were established for different reasons) A close runner-up (chronologically) would be the similar treatment given to the families of rubber workers in the Belgian Congo.