electric.avenue
lots of work to be done
I think travel does in general broaden the mind - that's just my own experience, and the experience of people I've met. I know this is a huge bone of contention however, but it is usually people who have never really travelled that insist that travel does not broaden the mind. A bit like people who have never had children saying that children do not change your life and outlook. I'm not trying to claim that a bit of travelling would change a raving bigot into somebody more broad minded, but I still reckon that travel gives you something that nothing else can - otherwise, why do it?
I'm not saying that people who have never travelled are necessarily narrow minded, but I do think they are more prone to stereotyping people of other nationalities, cos the popular stereotypes are usually all they have to go on. Again, this is just my own observation. They also seem more fearful/anxious about other languages, and have this idea that English is somehow more central and fundamental than other languages. I do think that it is a peculiarly British/Anglo Saxon thing that people see the learning of other languages as either undesirable or unattainable.
I agree that travel costs can be prohibitive - no argument there. But this whole debate started as an aside about Mark Steel's book, about some things he said that surprised me a bit. I wouldn't have thought that Mark would be short of the money to see a few places. Some of the most insular people I've met were not short of the money to travel.
I don't see travel as being some sort of qualification/measure of being a decent human being. I just reckon that you can't get away from the fact that if you haven't travelled, you are a bit more insular, that's all.
And one of the points I'm making is that I am baffled by the apparently insular attitudes of some British socialists who claim to be internationalists. I wouldn't describe Mark Steel as insular, but it's just that one or two of the things he said seemed very Britocentric.
I'm not saying that people who have never travelled are necessarily narrow minded, but I do think they are more prone to stereotyping people of other nationalities, cos the popular stereotypes are usually all they have to go on. Again, this is just my own observation. They also seem more fearful/anxious about other languages, and have this idea that English is somehow more central and fundamental than other languages. I do think that it is a peculiarly British/Anglo Saxon thing that people see the learning of other languages as either undesirable or unattainable.
I agree that travel costs can be prohibitive - no argument there. But this whole debate started as an aside about Mark Steel's book, about some things he said that surprised me a bit. I wouldn't have thought that Mark would be short of the money to see a few places. Some of the most insular people I've met were not short of the money to travel.
I don't see travel as being some sort of qualification/measure of being a decent human being. I just reckon that you can't get away from the fact that if you haven't travelled, you are a bit more insular, that's all.
And one of the points I'm making is that I am baffled by the apparently insular attitudes of some British socialists who claim to be internationalists. I wouldn't describe Mark Steel as insular, but it's just that one or two of the things he said seemed very Britocentric.
whys it 'quaint' to use the term foreign holiday? 

(Dealing with the pain of a marriage break up and then the breakaway from the political movement that had taken up half of his life it's understandable - even for a comedian.)