Welcome to the Official Britsplainer to the USA Project
Pull up a chair. Kettle’s on. Let's do this. Somewhere along the line, entirely without applying for the job, I appear to have become the Official Britsplainer to the USA. A role that mainly involves sitting at my kitchen table in Britain and explaining fairly basic things back across the Atlantic.
|
What is this?
This is the home of it all. The archive. The evidence. The ongoing public service announcement. Every Britsplaining post, every explanation, every moment of quiet disbelief carefully documented for posterity — and, more importantly, for reference the next time something completely baffling needs gently (or not so gently) explaining. Why does this exist? Because apparently it needs to. Because at some point we reached a place where:
It’s about being just concerned enough to say something. What to expect. Expect:
|
|
|
|
Britsplainer to the USA Archive
Britsplaining #17: 4th May 2026
Britsplaining… Let’s explain this one slowly. Like we’re walking someone away from a plug socket.
A republic means you don’t have a king. A democracy means people vote for who runs things.
Right? Good. Hold that thought.
Now. I keep seeing Americans going, “the United States isn’t a democracy, it’s a republic.”
That’s like saying: “It’s not a sandwich, it’s bread with stuff in it.”
Or: “It’s not water, it’s hydrogen and oxygen.”
Or my personal favourite: “It’s not a dog, it’s a labrador.”
A republic is the structure. A democracy is how that works.
The US is a democratic republic. Both. Simultaneously. At the same time. Together. Holding hands.
The voting bit? That’s the democracy.
The no-king bit? That’s the republic.
You need both for the sentence to make any fucking sense.
So when someone proudly announces: “It’s not a democracy, it’s a republic.”
What they’re actually saying is: “I’ve heard a phrase. I don’t understand it. But I’m going to use it with confidence anyway.”
Which, to be fair, is also a very on-brand demonstration of how modern American politics works.
And it usually appears right after democracy produces a result they don’t like.
Britsplaining… Let’s explain this one slowly. Like we’re walking someone away from a plug socket.
A republic means you don’t have a king. A democracy means people vote for who runs things.
Right? Good. Hold that thought.
Now. I keep seeing Americans going, “the United States isn’t a democracy, it’s a republic.”
That’s like saying: “It’s not a sandwich, it’s bread with stuff in it.”
Or: “It’s not water, it’s hydrogen and oxygen.”
Or my personal favourite: “It’s not a dog, it’s a labrador.”
A republic is the structure. A democracy is how that works.
The US is a democratic republic. Both. Simultaneously. At the same time. Together. Holding hands.
The voting bit? That’s the democracy.
The no-king bit? That’s the republic.
You need both for the sentence to make any fucking sense.
So when someone proudly announces: “It’s not a democracy, it’s a republic.”
What they’re actually saying is: “I’ve heard a phrase. I don’t understand it. But I’m going to use it with confidence anyway.”
Which, to be fair, is also a very on-brand demonstration of how modern American politics works.
And it usually appears right after democracy produces a result they don’t like.
Britsplaining #16: 2nd May 2026
Britsplaining America’s abortion debate.
Roe v. Wade wasn’t about “forcing abortions.” It was about protecting a woman’s right to bodily autonomy from the state and from religion. The right to choose. The right to privacy. The right not to have politicians, televangelists, or men in red hats making medical decisions for her.
And what’s always fascinated the rest of us is how much of the American Christian Right wraps itself in “Biblical truth” while quietly hoping nobody actually reads the fucking Bible. Because abortion is barely mentioned at all.
The one passage most often discussed, in Numbers 5 in the Old Testament. Literally a ritual in which a priest administers a concoction to a woman accused of adultery that may induce miscarriage if she is deemed guilty. A forced miscarriage. Abortion. Ordained by God.
Meanwhile Jesus himself says absolutely fucking nothing about abortion in the New Testament. Nothing!
Which means the modern American anti-abortion movement isn’t about Biblical truth, but about political power wrapped in religious extremism.
And that’s the bit that is deeply unsettling.
Because freedom either includes bodily autonomy… or it’s just state control wearing a cross, and there’s no freedom.!
Because without women’s autonomy over their bodies, there is no freedom in the USA.
Britsplaining America’s abortion debate.
Roe v. Wade wasn’t about “forcing abortions.” It was about protecting a woman’s right to bodily autonomy from the state and from religion. The right to choose. The right to privacy. The right not to have politicians, televangelists, or men in red hats making medical decisions for her.
And what’s always fascinated the rest of us is how much of the American Christian Right wraps itself in “Biblical truth” while quietly hoping nobody actually reads the fucking Bible. Because abortion is barely mentioned at all.
The one passage most often discussed, in Numbers 5 in the Old Testament. Literally a ritual in which a priest administers a concoction to a woman accused of adultery that may induce miscarriage if she is deemed guilty. A forced miscarriage. Abortion. Ordained by God.
Meanwhile Jesus himself says absolutely fucking nothing about abortion in the New Testament. Nothing!
Which means the modern American anti-abortion movement isn’t about Biblical truth, but about political power wrapped in religious extremism.
And that’s the bit that is deeply unsettling.
Because freedom either includes bodily autonomy… or it’s just state control wearing a cross, and there’s no freedom.!
Because without women’s autonomy over their bodies, there is no freedom in the USA.
Britsplaining #15: 2nd May 2026
Britsplaining about the bomb-proof ballroom again…
It’s not a solution to political violence. It’s the most American misunderstanding of the problem: build a ballroom, thicken the glass, dig a bunker underneath it, and pretend the danger is outside.
But the issue isn’t the ballroom. That’s a daft distraction. It’s the culture.
Not just gun culture, that heavily armed elephant in the ballroom, but a culture of violence: political, rhetorical, mythological. Frontier mentality. Revenge fantasy…
Armed masculinity. Every disagreement framed in the language of war.
And the data matters, because the “violent left” line gets repeated a lot.
CSIS found left-wing violence rose in 2025, but from very low levels, still below right-wing violence historically. ADL reported all extremist-related murders in 2024 were committed by right-wing extremists. Similar patterns show up year after year.
So no, the answer isn’t better architecture.
Because if your response to political violence is a fortified ballroom for the powerful, you’re not addressing violence.
You’re building a safer place to watch it from.
The question isn’t how thick the glass is.
It’s why the country outside it keeps producing people willing to shoot through it. Because this is a country that mythologised violence at its birth, and has been living inside that story ever since.
Britsplaining about the bomb-proof ballroom again…
It’s not a solution to political violence. It’s the most American misunderstanding of the problem: build a ballroom, thicken the glass, dig a bunker underneath it, and pretend the danger is outside.
But the issue isn’t the ballroom. That’s a daft distraction. It’s the culture.
Not just gun culture, that heavily armed elephant in the ballroom, but a culture of violence: political, rhetorical, mythological. Frontier mentality. Revenge fantasy…
Armed masculinity. Every disagreement framed in the language of war.
And the data matters, because the “violent left” line gets repeated a lot.
CSIS found left-wing violence rose in 2025, but from very low levels, still below right-wing violence historically. ADL reported all extremist-related murders in 2024 were committed by right-wing extremists. Similar patterns show up year after year.
So no, the answer isn’t better architecture.
Because if your response to political violence is a fortified ballroom for the powerful, you’re not addressing violence.
You’re building a safer place to watch it from.
The question isn’t how thick the glass is.
It’s why the country outside it keeps producing people willing to shoot through it. Because this is a country that mythologised violence at its birth, and has been living inside that story ever since.
Britsplaining #14: 30th April 2026
Britsplaining to the USA
Why does MAGA feels like a cult?
It’s not because we don’t understand America. It’s because we’ve seen America do this before.
Just… usually with a church, a prophet, and a compound at the end of a dirt road.
United States… the religious cult maths.
5,000–10,000 active cult / cult-like groups 1,000–3,000 are high-control / coercive 2–3 million Americans currently involved 5–10 million been involved at some point
That’s not fringe. That’s not a handful of weirdos in the desert.
That’s millions of people cycling through systems built on loyalty, belief, and one unquestionable voice.
So when something starts walking, talking, and behaving like a cult… it’s not a misunderstanding from the outside.
It’s familiarity. It’s pattern recognition.
Just scaled up, mainstreamed, and wrapped in a flag instead of a sermon.
Britsplaining to the USA
Why does MAGA feels like a cult?
It’s not because we don’t understand America. It’s because we’ve seen America do this before.
Just… usually with a church, a prophet, and a compound at the end of a dirt road.
United States… the religious cult maths.
5,000–10,000 active cult / cult-like groups 1,000–3,000 are high-control / coercive 2–3 million Americans currently involved 5–10 million been involved at some point
That’s not fringe. That’s not a handful of weirdos in the desert.
That’s millions of people cycling through systems built on loyalty, belief, and one unquestionable voice.
So when something starts walking, talking, and behaving like a cult… it’s not a misunderstanding from the outside.
It’s familiarity. It’s pattern recognition.
Just scaled up, mainstreamed, and wrapped in a flag instead of a sermon.
Britsplaining #13: 29th April 2026
After King Charles III, Britsplaining to the United States of America (250 years old)… Let’s look at which ancient nation might step next…
So far…
Iran (2,500+ years old): Trolling with AI Lego videos
UK (1,000+ years old): Sends a King to Britsplain “no kings”
Who next?
Greece (2,500+ years old): Reminds everyone who invented democracy
Italy (2,000+ years old): Points at what happens to empires
France (1,500+ years old): Reminds you what happens when people get fed up with their rulers
After King Charles III, Britsplaining to the United States of America (250 years old)… Let’s look at which ancient nation might step next…
So far…
Iran (2,500+ years old): Trolling with AI Lego videos
UK (1,000+ years old): Sends a King to Britsplain “no kings”
Who next?
Greece (2,500+ years old): Reminds everyone who invented democracy
Italy (2,000+ years old): Points at what happens to empires
France (1,500+ years old): Reminds you what happens when people get fed up with their rulers
Britsplaining #12: 28th April 2026
Britsplaining.
“Where are the ‘No Kings’ protesters now Charles is here?”
Right. Deep breath.
In the UK, the King is basically a bloke in a hat who waves and reads lines someone else wrote. No real power. No decisions. Just vibes and ceremony.
In USA, POTUS acting like the rules don’t apply to him. Power grabby. Acts like a despotic king! That’s the problem.
Protests weren’t about the word “king.”
They were about someone acting like one.
Same word. Different thing.
It’s not fucking hard.
Britsplaining.
“Where are the ‘No Kings’ protesters now Charles is here?”
Right. Deep breath.
In the UK, the King is basically a bloke in a hat who waves and reads lines someone else wrote. No real power. No decisions. Just vibes and ceremony.
In USA, POTUS acting like the rules don’t apply to him. Power grabby. Acts like a despotic king! That’s the problem.
Protests weren’t about the word “king.”
They were about someone acting like one.
Same word. Different thing.
It’s not fucking hard.
Britsplaining #11: 27th April 2026
Seeing a lot of noise about Trump and the Falklands, so, quick bit of Britsplaining.
First, the simple bit. Britain’s current line is self-determination: the people who live somewhere decide what happens to it. Falklands (2013): 99.8% voted to remain British. Gibraltar (2002): 98.9% rejected shared sovereignty. Clear votes. Clear outcomes.
Now the Trump bit.
Because when Trump says “self-determination,” he doesn’t mean people choosing their future.
He means he’s already decided it for them.
It’s not democracy. It’s Trump trying to bully us, to punish us, because we won’t play ball with him.
Meanwhile, the US has territories, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, where status is still debated, unresolved, and tied up in strategic interests.
Which brings us back to the point.
Self-determination isn’t something you unilaterally choose. That’s not democracy. It’s something you accept, even when it’s not your decision to make.
Also he has bolstered Argentina’s false claim on the Falklands. The UK settled them in 1765, before Argentina even existed as an independent nation-state. The Spanish settled briefly, but abandoned them in 1811, Argentina became independent in 1816. The UK fully established them as a territory in 1833, so almost 200 years of unbroken history.
If Argentina try to take them again, it will be another American proxy war. But this time against the UK and that isn’t a war the USA wants to get into.
Seeing a lot of noise about Trump and the Falklands, so, quick bit of Britsplaining.
First, the simple bit. Britain’s current line is self-determination: the people who live somewhere decide what happens to it. Falklands (2013): 99.8% voted to remain British. Gibraltar (2002): 98.9% rejected shared sovereignty. Clear votes. Clear outcomes.
Now the Trump bit.
Because when Trump says “self-determination,” he doesn’t mean people choosing their future.
He means he’s already decided it for them.
It’s not democracy. It’s Trump trying to bully us, to punish us, because we won’t play ball with him.
Meanwhile, the US has territories, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, where status is still debated, unresolved, and tied up in strategic interests.
Which brings us back to the point.
Self-determination isn’t something you unilaterally choose. That’s not democracy. It’s something you accept, even when it’s not your decision to make.
Also he has bolstered Argentina’s false claim on the Falklands. The UK settled them in 1765, before Argentina even existed as an independent nation-state. The Spanish settled briefly, but abandoned them in 1811, Argentina became independent in 1816. The UK fully established them as a territory in 1833, so almost 200 years of unbroken history.
If Argentina try to take them again, it will be another American proxy war. But this time against the UK and that isn’t a war the USA wants to get into.
Britsplaining #10: 27th April 2026
Britsplaining.
Latest news out of the Correspondents’ Dinner, an incident still being pieced together, and within minutes it’s already been cast: plot, motive, hero, villain. Give it short shrift and there’s a Lego version from Iran doing the rounds before the facts have even finished tying their laces.
Then you notice the staging.
Trump, who’s dodged this dinner since that Obama roasting, just happens to be there this time. But with no comedian. A mentalist instead.
And almost instantly, all this is reframed as strength. Survival. Image. Even drifting into talk of ballrooms and legacy, as if we’ve pivoted from “what happened?” to “what’s the branding?”
From a slightly raised British eyebrow, it doesn’t read like clarity.
It reads like choreography. Not fake, just performed. Narrative first. Facts later.
Which is when you catch yourself thinking…
“assassination is a dying art form.”
But because even as theatre, it’s not very good anymore.
This isn’t high drama. It’s amdram.
Village hall drama society energy. Overcooked lines. Missed cues. Everyone a bit too loud, a bit too certain, a beat too early.
Big claims, thin script. And that’s the uncomfortable part… not just that everything becomes spectacle… but that the spectacle itself is so painfully, embarrassingly poor.
They cancelled the comedian to avoid a roasting…
…and replaced it with a production that roasted itself.
Britsplaining.
Latest news out of the Correspondents’ Dinner, an incident still being pieced together, and within minutes it’s already been cast: plot, motive, hero, villain. Give it short shrift and there’s a Lego version from Iran doing the rounds before the facts have even finished tying their laces.
Then you notice the staging.
Trump, who’s dodged this dinner since that Obama roasting, just happens to be there this time. But with no comedian. A mentalist instead.
And almost instantly, all this is reframed as strength. Survival. Image. Even drifting into talk of ballrooms and legacy, as if we’ve pivoted from “what happened?” to “what’s the branding?”
From a slightly raised British eyebrow, it doesn’t read like clarity.
It reads like choreography. Not fake, just performed. Narrative first. Facts later.
Which is when you catch yourself thinking…
“assassination is a dying art form.”
But because even as theatre, it’s not very good anymore.
This isn’t high drama. It’s amdram.
Village hall drama society energy. Overcooked lines. Missed cues. Everyone a bit too loud, a bit too certain, a beat too early.
Big claims, thin script. And that’s the uncomfortable part… not just that everything becomes spectacle… but that the spectacle itself is so painfully, embarrassingly poor.
They cancelled the comedian to avoid a roasting…
…and replaced it with a production that roasted itself.
Britsplaining #9: 26th April 2026
Exercising my freedom to Britsplain to the USA about FREEDOM™…
It’s the one thing that always stands out is how often the word “freedom” comes up.
Not just as a value, as a kind of all-purpose answer.
“Why is it like that?” “Freedom.”
At this point it feels less like a principle… and more like a reflex. Because it seems to apply very selectively.
Guns? Freedom. Shooting kids in schools? Still somehow freedom.
But body autonomy? Not always. Abortion rights? Depends. Healthcare? Erm…
Under scrutiny, it starts to collapse under its own contradictions.
And that’s where it gets confusing.
Because when something’s used that often, and that inconsistently, it starts to lose all meaning.
You do start to wonder what “freedom” actually refers to anymore.
“Land of the free, home of the brave.”
From the outside, that starts to sound less like a statement… and more like a painfully awkward question.
Exercising my freedom to Britsplain to the USA about FREEDOM™…
It’s the one thing that always stands out is how often the word “freedom” comes up.
Not just as a value, as a kind of all-purpose answer.
“Why is it like that?” “Freedom.”
At this point it feels less like a principle… and more like a reflex. Because it seems to apply very selectively.
Guns? Freedom. Shooting kids in schools? Still somehow freedom.
But body autonomy? Not always. Abortion rights? Depends. Healthcare? Erm…
Under scrutiny, it starts to collapse under its own contradictions.
And that’s where it gets confusing.
Because when something’s used that often, and that inconsistently, it starts to lose all meaning.
You do start to wonder what “freedom” actually refers to anymore.
“Land of the free, home of the brave.”
From the outside, that starts to sound less like a statement… and more like a painfully awkward question.
Britsplaining #8: 25th April 2026
Britsplaining to the USA again, on a roll at the moment… Following on from the last “Team America” one, there’s something else that always stands out from the outside.
Americans online saying “that’s illegal”…with absolute confidence.
As if the rest of the world is just a slightly disorganised extension of the US legal system that hasn’t updated properly.
Donald Trump regularly weighing in on how other countries should run themselves, the UK, France, wherever takes his interest that week.
Laws, leadership, policy… all handed out like helpful advice. Unsolicited, obviously.
And that’s the part that’s oddly consistent. Not just acting globally, but assuming the rest of the world is waiting for direction. It’s that exceptionalism monster raising its head again.
From the outside… it just looks like the loudest, drunkest bloke in the pub explaining how everyone else should run their lives. While falling over shitting himself, and not even noticing the smell is coming from him.
Britsplaining to the USA again, on a roll at the moment… Following on from the last “Team America” one, there’s something else that always stands out from the outside.
Americans online saying “that’s illegal”…with absolute confidence.
As if the rest of the world is just a slightly disorganised extension of the US legal system that hasn’t updated properly.
Donald Trump regularly weighing in on how other countries should run themselves, the UK, France, wherever takes his interest that week.
Laws, leadership, policy… all handed out like helpful advice. Unsolicited, obviously.
And that’s the part that’s oddly consistent. Not just acting globally, but assuming the rest of the world is waiting for direction. It’s that exceptionalism monster raising its head again.
From the outside… it just looks like the loudest, drunkest bloke in the pub explaining how everyone else should run their lives. While falling over shitting himself, and not even noticing the smell is coming from him.
Britsplaining #7: 24th April 2026
Britsplaining to Team America 🇺🇸
From the outside, the US sometimes feels less like a country and more like global role playing dress up.
Military presence everywhere. Involvement in conflicts worldwide.
They like thinking they’re the world’s police force. Not officially, of course… but consistently enough that even Hollywood made a film about it.
Team America: World Police was obviously satire.
But like most satire, it only really works because there’s something recognisable underneath it.
That idea that American power, military, political, even legal, doesn’t just stay within its own borders.
It travels… Usually like a loud, brash, drunk uncle no-one invited to the party. That gate crashes anyway.
Most countries focus on their own affairs first. What happened to “America First”? Wasn’t that meant to be the policy?
The US often operates far beyond its borders, intervening, influencing, setting the tone.
Not just foreign policy. Something closer to… global school yard bully.
Britsplaining to Team America 🇺🇸
From the outside, the US sometimes feels less like a country and more like global role playing dress up.
Military presence everywhere. Involvement in conflicts worldwide.
They like thinking they’re the world’s police force. Not officially, of course… but consistently enough that even Hollywood made a film about it.
Team America: World Police was obviously satire.
But like most satire, it only really works because there’s something recognisable underneath it.
That idea that American power, military, political, even legal, doesn’t just stay within its own borders.
It travels… Usually like a loud, brash, drunk uncle no-one invited to the party. That gate crashes anyway.
Most countries focus on their own affairs first. What happened to “America First”? Wasn’t that meant to be the policy?
The US often operates far beyond its borders, intervening, influencing, setting the tone.
Not just foreign policy. Something closer to… global school yard bully.
Britsplaining #6: 23rd April 2026
Britsplaining… The American Dream.
It’s something most of us outside the US grow up with. In films, TV, music, the idea that you can build a better life if you try hard enough.
It’s everywhere.
And it’s always presented like something uniquely American. But from the outside, that part is a bit confusing.
At the core of it, opportunity, mobility, building a decent life, isn’t a “dream”.
It’s just… what most developed countries try to provide as standard.
You don’t need a slogan for it.
You just expect it to be there. And that’s where it starts to feel less like reality and more like mythology.
Because if something as basic as opportunity needs to be constantly packaged, sold, and repeated… it usually means it isn’t happening as easily as advertised.
Feels like the ghost of James Truslow Adams, writing through the Great Depression, has pulled up a chair at my kitchen table. Watching me a Brit, tea in hand, carrying on the same job: watching the USA, and quietly taking notes.
Britsplaining… The American Dream.
It’s something most of us outside the US grow up with. In films, TV, music, the idea that you can build a better life if you try hard enough.
It’s everywhere.
And it’s always presented like something uniquely American. But from the outside, that part is a bit confusing.
At the core of it, opportunity, mobility, building a decent life, isn’t a “dream”.
It’s just… what most developed countries try to provide as standard.
You don’t need a slogan for it.
You just expect it to be there. And that’s where it starts to feel less like reality and more like mythology.
Because if something as basic as opportunity needs to be constantly packaged, sold, and repeated… it usually means it isn’t happening as easily as advertised.
Feels like the ghost of James Truslow Adams, writing through the Great Depression, has pulled up a chair at my kitchen table. Watching me a Brit, tea in hand, carrying on the same job: watching the USA, and quietly taking notes.
Britsplaining #5: 22nd April 2026
Britsplaining to the USA: Work Culture
Just so you know, I’m writing this from my kitchen table. Cuppa in hand… Doing my job.
I haven’t had a “proper job” in well over a decade. Always been self-employed. Had many different businesses. Now I drink tea and write things like this for a living.
So I’m hardly a model of hard graft.
And even from here… American work culture looks a bit over-the-top. “Work smarter not harder” is my motto… So let’s get into this…
Dear USA
You’ve got no guaranteed paid holiday. No guaranteed paid sick leave. No guaranteed paid maternity leave at a national level.
Most of the developed world sorted that out decades ago. The USA sits alongside tiny handful of much smaller nations, many with far fewer resources to be able to give paid maternity leave. This is something you should really hang your heads in shame over.
Plus millions of poor people are working multiple jobs, or relying on tips, just to scrape by.
And the strange part is, it’s framed as a strength.
Working through exhaustion. Skipping time off. Juggling jobs. Depending on tips. Going straight back after having a child.
From the outside, it doesn’t look like ambition. It doesn’t look like the American Dream… It looks like an American nightmare… dressed up as work ethic.
It’s not smart to work hard for little reward, but it is hard to see smart people kicked down by the daily grind of a system designed to keep you down.
Britsplaining to the USA: Work Culture
Just so you know, I’m writing this from my kitchen table. Cuppa in hand… Doing my job.
I haven’t had a “proper job” in well over a decade. Always been self-employed. Had many different businesses. Now I drink tea and write things like this for a living.
So I’m hardly a model of hard graft.
And even from here… American work culture looks a bit over-the-top. “Work smarter not harder” is my motto… So let’s get into this…
Dear USA
You’ve got no guaranteed paid holiday. No guaranteed paid sick leave. No guaranteed paid maternity leave at a national level.
Most of the developed world sorted that out decades ago. The USA sits alongside tiny handful of much smaller nations, many with far fewer resources to be able to give paid maternity leave. This is something you should really hang your heads in shame over.
Plus millions of poor people are working multiple jobs, or relying on tips, just to scrape by.
And the strange part is, it’s framed as a strength.
Working through exhaustion. Skipping time off. Juggling jobs. Depending on tips. Going straight back after having a child.
From the outside, it doesn’t look like ambition. It doesn’t look like the American Dream… It looks like an American nightmare… dressed up as work ethic.
It’s not smart to work hard for little reward, but it is hard to see smart people kicked down by the daily grind of a system designed to keep you down.
Britsplaining #4: 21st April 2026
A more Transatlantic meeting of minds Britsplaining post, in response to a post from an American about picking up allergy tablets in Germany and noticing braille on the packaging.
It caught them off guard. Which says a lot.
Because this isn’t innovation. It’s what happens when systems are designed to include people by default.
They said it made them realise how unprepared the US is for people with disabilities.
That’s the point. Accessibility isn’t optional. It’s equal access. Equal care.
In places with universal healthcare and welfare systems, that thinking is built in.
In others… it has to justify its cost.
And that contrast is hard to ignore.
One system treats healthcare as a shared responsibility. The other leaves it to markets, margins, and whether it’s worth doing.
So when something this basic is missing, it doesn’t look like an oversight.
It looks like exactly what the system was designed to prioritise. Profits over people!
Note: Appreciate the original post from
@djjohnmichael, exactly the kind of American perspective that makes Britsplaining worth doing. What I do isn’t aimed at Americans as individuals, but at the system and the assumptions around them as a nation. Plenty of Americans are thoughtful and open, especially those who’ve travelled beyond the US and seen how differently things can be done. That’s where the conversation actually starts.
A more Transatlantic meeting of minds Britsplaining post, in response to a post from an American about picking up allergy tablets in Germany and noticing braille on the packaging.
It caught them off guard. Which says a lot.
Because this isn’t innovation. It’s what happens when systems are designed to include people by default.
They said it made them realise how unprepared the US is for people with disabilities.
That’s the point. Accessibility isn’t optional. It’s equal access. Equal care.
In places with universal healthcare and welfare systems, that thinking is built in.
In others… it has to justify its cost.
And that contrast is hard to ignore.
One system treats healthcare as a shared responsibility. The other leaves it to markets, margins, and whether it’s worth doing.
So when something this basic is missing, it doesn’t look like an oversight.
It looks like exactly what the system was designed to prioritise. Profits over people!
Note: Appreciate the original post from
@djjohnmichael, exactly the kind of American perspective that makes Britsplaining worth doing. What I do isn’t aimed at Americans as individuals, but at the system and the assumptions around them as a nation. Plenty of Americans are thoughtful and open, especially those who’ve travelled beyond the US and seen how differently things can be done. That’s where the conversation actually starts.
Britsplaining #3: 20th April 2026
Britsplaining to the USA: Tipping.
A tip, by definition, is optional. That’s the whole point. A little extra for good service.
A thank you.
In Britain, you might leave 10% if it’s decent. If it isn’t… you don’t. End of story.
Then you go to the USA… and somehow an optional gesture has become a compulsory surcharge. 20% minimum, or you’re morally bankrupt.
At which point it’s not a tip anymore, is it? It’s just… part of the bill.
All because the obvious fix… paying staff a proper wage… gets quietly sidestepped.
So instead you’ve got this strange little quirk of capitalism where ordinary people top up what amounts to slave wages… while the people at the top keep costs down and profits up.
Everyone calls it generosity.
But it looks a lot like customers subsidising worker exploitation, so the rich can get richer… and the poor waiting staff stay poor.
For the land of the free… it’s a strictly enforced kind of “optional.”
Note to reader: The term “slave wages” (and its cousin “wage slave”) is a British idiom referring to the exploitation of labour, employers taking the piss. Not a literal comparison to chattel slavery.
I feel the need to clarify this, as some people online can be a touchy. For context, I’m writing from the hometown of William Wilberforce, a key player in the Slave Trade Act 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. The USA didn’t abolished slavery until 1865.
So yes, the phrase is deliberate.
Britsplaining to the USA: Tipping.
A tip, by definition, is optional. That’s the whole point. A little extra for good service.
A thank you.
In Britain, you might leave 10% if it’s decent. If it isn’t… you don’t. End of story.
Then you go to the USA… and somehow an optional gesture has become a compulsory surcharge. 20% minimum, or you’re morally bankrupt.
At which point it’s not a tip anymore, is it? It’s just… part of the bill.
All because the obvious fix… paying staff a proper wage… gets quietly sidestepped.
So instead you’ve got this strange little quirk of capitalism where ordinary people top up what amounts to slave wages… while the people at the top keep costs down and profits up.
Everyone calls it generosity.
But it looks a lot like customers subsidising worker exploitation, so the rich can get richer… and the poor waiting staff stay poor.
For the land of the free… it’s a strictly enforced kind of “optional.”
Note to reader: The term “slave wages” (and its cousin “wage slave”) is a British idiom referring to the exploitation of labour, employers taking the piss. Not a literal comparison to chattel slavery.
I feel the need to clarify this, as some people online can be a touchy. For context, I’m writing from the hometown of William Wilberforce, a key player in the Slave Trade Act 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. The USA didn’t abolished slavery until 1865.
So yes, the phrase is deliberate.
Britsplaining #2: 19th April 2026
Dear USA (not all Americans… but always Americans),
What is going on with the bleaching of meat?
Because I keep seeing it and I need answers.
Putting raw meat in hydrogen peroxide and watching it turn pale… That’s not “cleaning” it. That’s a chemical reaction. You’re oxidising the meat, not making it safer.
And washing raw meat?
Food safety advice is very clear:
👉 Don’t do it
It doesn’t remove bacteria. It spreads it around your kitchen in tiny droplets.
You’re making things worse.
If the concern is bacteria, there’s a very simple solution:
👉 Cook it properly
Heat kills pathogens. That’s literally the point.
You don’t need to rinse it. You definitely don’t need to bleach it.
Where has this come from? I know your food is low quality, but is that bad?
Because it feels like one of those “common sense” things that is, in fact, complete nonsense.
This has been an official Britsplainer announcement.
Follow for more unnecessary but apparently essential guidance.
Dear USA (not all Americans… but always Americans),
What is going on with the bleaching of meat?
Because I keep seeing it and I need answers.
Putting raw meat in hydrogen peroxide and watching it turn pale… That’s not “cleaning” it. That’s a chemical reaction. You’re oxidising the meat, not making it safer.
And washing raw meat?
Food safety advice is very clear:
👉 Don’t do it
It doesn’t remove bacteria. It spreads it around your kitchen in tiny droplets.
You’re making things worse.
If the concern is bacteria, there’s a very simple solution:
👉 Cook it properly
Heat kills pathogens. That’s literally the point.
You don’t need to rinse it. You definitely don’t need to bleach it.
Where has this come from? I know your food is low quality, but is that bad?
Because it feels like one of those “common sense” things that is, in fact, complete nonsense.
This has been an official Britsplainer announcement.
Follow for more unnecessary but apparently essential guidance.
Britsplaining #1: 6th April 2026
Dear USA,
Quick note from a Brit who appears to know your Constitution better than you.
Bit embarrassing. But here we are.
The 25th Amendment isn’t a big red “remove the President” button.
It’s a mess of politics, ego, and loyalists. People who owe their jobs to the man you’re trying to remove.
Step one: the VP and a majority of the Cabinet have to declare the President unfit.
So, to be clear, you need his inner circle to walk into work and say, “We’re committing career suicide today.”
Then, brace yourselves, the President can simply say, “No, I’m not leaving,” and take power back.
That’s it. He’s still in power. At which point it escalates to:
Step two: do it again, but this time kick it to Congress.
And now you need a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate.
In modern US politics. You can’t agree on what to have for lunch, and you’re banking on constitutional consensus.
So, it looks less like a safeguard and more like a crumbling of your very foundations.
A failed system that performs the ritual of intervention while the collapse carries on uninterrupted.
So when people say, “Just invoke the 25th,” what they mean is: - convince a cult of loyalists to revolt - survive the immediate pushback - then achieve overwhelming bipartisan agreement in a system designed to avoid exactly that…
In other words: not a plan. A fantasy. A never going to happen…
Sorry to be the one to say it, but structurally speaking…
You’re not sitting on an eject button.
You’re in the cockpit of a plane on a collision course, arguing about whether the eject button exists while the ground rises to meet you.
From over here, it doesn’t look like politics. It looks like a system paralysed by its own inept design.
And at a certain point, it stops being about whether anything can be done, and becomes about whether anything ever could have been.
Anyway… from across the Atlantic, watching it unfold exactly as expected…
Best of luck. You’re all fucked. Sorry!
Oh and… Article II, Section 4 is impeachment, removing a president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”, but it’s not a quick fix either. The House can impeach with a majority, but that only brings charges. Removal requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate after a trial. In a deeply divided system, that will never happen. So like the 25th Amendment, it’s a solution on paper, but in practice it only works if enough of the system is willing to turn on the president, and that’s the real barrier.
Dear USA,
Quick note from a Brit who appears to know your Constitution better than you.
Bit embarrassing. But here we are.
The 25th Amendment isn’t a big red “remove the President” button.
It’s a mess of politics, ego, and loyalists. People who owe their jobs to the man you’re trying to remove.
Step one: the VP and a majority of the Cabinet have to declare the President unfit.
So, to be clear, you need his inner circle to walk into work and say, “We’re committing career suicide today.”
Then, brace yourselves, the President can simply say, “No, I’m not leaving,” and take power back.
That’s it. He’s still in power. At which point it escalates to:
Step two: do it again, but this time kick it to Congress.
And now you need a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate.
In modern US politics. You can’t agree on what to have for lunch, and you’re banking on constitutional consensus.
So, it looks less like a safeguard and more like a crumbling of your very foundations.
A failed system that performs the ritual of intervention while the collapse carries on uninterrupted.
So when people say, “Just invoke the 25th,” what they mean is: - convince a cult of loyalists to revolt - survive the immediate pushback - then achieve overwhelming bipartisan agreement in a system designed to avoid exactly that…
In other words: not a plan. A fantasy. A never going to happen…
Sorry to be the one to say it, but structurally speaking…
You’re not sitting on an eject button.
You’re in the cockpit of a plane on a collision course, arguing about whether the eject button exists while the ground rises to meet you.
From over here, it doesn’t look like politics. It looks like a system paralysed by its own inept design.
And at a certain point, it stops being about whether anything can be done, and becomes about whether anything ever could have been.
Anyway… from across the Atlantic, watching it unfold exactly as expected…
Best of luck. You’re all fucked. Sorry!
Oh and… Article II, Section 4 is impeachment, removing a president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”, but it’s not a quick fix either. The House can impeach with a majority, but that only brings charges. Removal requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate after a trial. In a deeply divided system, that will never happen. So like the 25th Amendment, it’s a solution on paper, but in practice it only works if enough of the system is willing to turn on the president, and that’s the real barrier.