Are the English people friendly to American expats?

Because a lot of Americans think that America saved Britain and we'd all be speaking German here now if it wasn't for them.

No I am serious...I have been naive about many things in my life...there was a girl in High School who said she loved me....but dumped me for a guy named Brad because he played football and I played the french horn (his parents bought him a brand new 280z also). I made a point of confronting him and he beat the crap out of me in front of about 10 people. I actually started crying. Good times...

I remember thinking about Bush, "What harm can he do? He seems pretty moderate..."

Recently after the crash I remember thinking, "Ahh finally proof that capitalism is destined for failure. The people will awaken now...."

Regarding the War. I think those with an interest in history understand its importance. In the context of modern Britain (and the US), it is pretty much the defining event of the last century. If you speak to a Brit who shares a love of history then the War is certainly going to come up. And I think most Brits who hold a good grasp of the circumstances of the War understand completely how different things would have turned out had Hitler not attacked Eastward and had the US not entered/provided support.

That was more of the context of the discussion, and it was actually a very nice discussion (one I have repeated many times with many people) - there is certainly nothing to be afraid of in discussing historical events given that all concerned can keep emotions in check. Nor was I actually fishing for a 'thanks' as I wasn't actually alive during the War.   

I find most people are friendly.  Like,  not overly friendly, but certainly polite and curious.

It actually helps me with work situations.  I've transitioned into a more sales role, so I have to talk to new people all the time, and as soon as I open my mouth, they know that obviously, I'm not from around here, and then it just starts off the conversation pretty easily.  The bonus is that being from NYC, most people seem to like to talk about it, or have a tripped planned, and want recommendations. 

So I've never found people to be unfriendly.   Basically, I find them the same as I did back home. 

Because a lot of Americans think that America saved Britain and we'd all be speaking German here now if it wasn't for them.

Which really only perpetuates the stereotype that Americans are an insular bunch and only look at things with America is the best ev-ah tunnel vision.

I find most people are friendly.  Like,  not overly friendly, but certainly polite and curious.

It actually helps me with work situations.  I've transitioned into a more sales role, so I have to talk to new people all the time, and as soon as I open my mouth, they know that obviously, I'm not from around here, and then it just starts off the conversation pretty easily.  The bonus is that being from NYC, most people seem to like to talk about it, or have a tripped planned, and want recommendations. 

So I've never found people to be unfriendly.   Basically, I find them the same as I did back home. 

I had forgotten but in my last job I spoke to people throughout the company on the phone a lot.  Once in a while, I'd get someone saying, 'It was great talking to someone with such a lovely accent.'  It always made me feel good.  It also disarmed some people who really wanted to yell at the HR department if they liked the American accent.

Because a lot of Americans think that America saved Britain and we'd all be speaking German here now if it wasn't for them.

Which really only perpetuates the stereotype that Americans are an insular bunch and only look at things with America is the best ev-ah tunnel vision.

Makes me think of that David Sedaris piece where he writes about how surprised Americans are to find out that other countries don't learn in elementary school that America is the best country on Earth. 

I don't think sonofasailor's reaction is totally unexpected; when I first came to the UK a few years ago I was surprised at the "You Yanks showed up late to WWII" jokes, because I'd never had any reason to think about WWII from a British perspective.  (I didn't take offense; it's enlightening to think about things from somebody else's point of view.) 

Maybe if I'd taken an advanced history class in high school or studied history at university I'd have had an understanding of WWII from a wider variety of viewpoints, but I'd guess that most Americans got the same WWII history lesson that I did in elementary school: America was the victim of an underhanded surprise attack by the Japanese, so we reluctantly entered WWII and saved the world from evil.  The End.   

Back to the original question, in my experience everyone has been friendly.  Occasionally people say something negative about American politics or culture, but nobody has ever said anything negative to me about being an American.

Which really only perpetuates the stereotype that Americans are an insular bunch and only look at things with America is the best ev-ah tunnel vision.

And just like every other stereotype, it takes much less to "prove" it than it does to disprove it.  Even if 70% of a group one is being stereotypical about holds a certain trait, especially a negative trait, we're doing the remaining 30% a disservice by assuming that they hold that trait.  But it's human nature to categorize things.  It's part of how we have been able to streamline judgement to allow time to think about other things as well as being able to make decisions without having innate instinctual knowledge without having to stop and waste valuable survival time making judgements about danger, which route to take, etc.  It doesn't always translate into moving beyond idiotic tribalism though (whether it's on Americans' part or otherwise).

As far as WWII is concerned, it's been interesting to get another perspective on it, and I am not necessarily thinking of just the British view.  I think I already knew about the resentment about America's isolationism and profiteering created in Europe, and how many Americans downplay the role of the UK and the USSR in Germany's defeat (not to mention having multiple fronts).  What I didn't really know was the ongoing bitterness about war reparations and just how unprepared the US was when it first entered.

As for insularity, I think it is more complicated than people outside the US actually understand it to be.  For instance, some things don't translate well.  A foreign holiday for many Americans isn't always a matter of driving a few hundred miles, taking a train, or a short hop on an air plane.  In fact, the oft quoted statistic about Americans and passports ignores the fact that most of North America and the Caribbean was accessible to Americans with their driver's licence and birth certificate (and sometimes just their driver's licence).  It wasn't until the past decade as requirements have been changed that Americans have been forced to get passports to go to Canada, Mexico, or many of the islands.

Karrit (giving credit where it's due ) always makes the good point that holidays in the US are for most people two weeks a year, most of the time not taken together.  When you consider the distances travelled just to get out of the US, that adds up to at least a day of travel out of that short holiday just to get on their way for people in some areas of the US.  Even visiting the east coast means that I spend about 20 hours travel time each way (adding travel to Heathrow, getting to the airport early for checks, the travel, layover--or in my case travel to train--final leg and then reverse on the way home to the UK).  

I don't want to go on and on about this, but earlier this year Nigel Farage (of UKIP and air crash fame) went on BBC QT and mentioned how insular Americans were.  They have papers that only cover local news and nothing outside a 50 mile radius!  Far be it from me to call Mr Farage a bigoted idiot who was trying to directly translate something that had a different cultural role in the US, but of course local papers cover local news. It's a bit like ignoring The Times or The Independent and using "The Turnbridge Wells Gazette" as an example of all printed media in the UK. The regional and national papers cover the national and international news (not to mention the much larger broadcast media).    But it is much easier for people to think that Farrage speaks the truth because it "proves" what people already know about Americans: they are insular idiots who care nothing about something that occurs a few miles from their dooryard.

TL;DR-People are people. We're shaped a bit by culture and circumstance, but nothing is ever a universal trait in a culture unless it's a human trait (like prejudice).

It is the Swiss German dialect, which grew in a different way than Swiss German has in Switzerland (well, not that there's a cohesive Swiss German, each town and region has slight and not so slight differences). I can understand some PA Dutch dialect after living in Switzerland for many years, but some of it is utterly unintelligible to me.

And like people in New England now, it is all based on what was.  For instance, I got into a conversation in a restaurant (with a name like Deitsch Eck I should have known) in Lenhartsville with this guy.

He worked in battery factory, but there were no batteries back in the day, so the conversation was German German, battery, German, German, trucks, cars. 

I wouldn't go to Germany and expect some deeper understanding of German culture because I have a putz under my tannenbaum. 

And for all those PA Dutch people out there, no it doesn't have a train.   

And just like every other stereotype, it takes much less to "prove" it than it does to disprove it.  Even if 70% of a group one is being stereotypical about holds a certain trait, especially a negative trait, we're doing the remaining 30% a disservice by assuming that they hold that trait.  But it's human nature to categorize things.  

If it is even 30% that doesn't hold that idea.  It is always the stupid ones who stand out. 

If it is even 30% that doesn't hold that idea.  It is always the stupid ones who stand out. 

I wasn't saying that only 30% of Americans aren't dim or have an interest in the world outside the US borders.   

Oh no, I know.  I should have added a  I just meant that in any context, it is always the annoying ones who are the loudest. 

Someone asked my husband if they had paper money in the UK.  I know this person at work, they weren't stupid and I bet this kid went home and was like, PAPER MONEY?!, that guy must think I am sooooo dumb.  Sometimes when you are trying to make conversation the stupidest stuff comes out. 

camoscato:

Yes. And I am interested in how the British form their opinions. I don't think they teach history in quite the same way here. I was taught from a very early age about the founding fathers, etc. It could be said that British history is so much longer and perhaps more complex that curriculum development here is a lot more difficult.

For instance I would think it would be very difficult to describe to children the events surrounding the War of the Roses or the 100 Years War (though US history certainly isn't as straight forward as the average textbook portrays - our simplicity owing to careful construct). But where do they get this idea that the US turned up late? It is of interest.

I seem to be drawn to people who enjoy bantering about things like this, and I guess that's why the War comes up. Because again, like the Empire, it is a very important part of the national psychi, and if one is to examine how we feel about each other it seems natural.

Because a lot of Americans think that America saved Britain and we'd all be speaking German here now if it wasn't for them.

I don't know why you mean by a lot of Americans. I wasn't taught that.

I was never taught that World War II began with the attack on Pearl Harbor. We learned about Kristallnacht and Hitler's attempt to "liberate" the Sudeten Germans in Czechoslovakia.

I thought that many American children read the Diary of Anne Frank.

I've been told that in Russia, they don't even call it "World War II". Schoolchildren are taught  that the other Allies weren't even involved; it wasn't a World War. Maybe someone who has been to school in Russia, or knows someone who has, can verify.

Regarding American insularity,it did annoy me when, after the US elections this years, someone on FB posted that they had voted and "were proud to be an American". As if America is the only country that is a democracy with free elections.

SoS:

Well, there was the whole idea that the US felt that the Allies would fall if they had to go it alone. Some of this was based on Germany fooling the US into thinking that they were stronger than they were (Linburgh's visit comes to mind).  Plus there was a strong isolationist sentiment after the horrors of WWI.  Some people thought that the news about what was going on with the Jews and others in Germany was propaganda.  Others (some notable like Ford) had a strong anti-Semitic motives.  Dalton Trumbo removed his book "Johnny Got his Gun" from printing because he felt it was being used to justify avoiding war for anti-Semitic reasons (before the invasion of the USSR, he was isolationist as well).  There's a conspiracy theory that FDR knew about Pearl Harbor, but let it happen to be able to justify a war declaration.

I think the first efforts of the US in Africa [edit: I guess I was right the first time, still not a military history buff] made a lasting impression as well...It seemed to be all bravado and an effort which took too long to organise to begin with.  And far from being altruism in action, the US supplying the allies with food and other goods (not to mention military supplies) did allow them to make a lot of money.  It was more financially profitable for the US to draw out the widespread occupation of large areas of Europe as long as possible.  Whether this was a factor in the timing of US war declaration and subsequent military involvement remains to be seen, but many Europeans feel this was a big motivation for US actions. [edit: After looking at the aid policies, I guess they are mainly talking about "Cash and Carry" and the post-war version of Lend Lease. In fact, I am pretty sure that I heard a French critique of the postwar aid as well.]

ETA: I am *not* a military history buff, but I have been a bit more drawn to it since I moved here.  I know what I was taught in school, and it wasn't that the US saved the world.  If I remember anyone trying to "teach me" that message, it was outside of school.

People here have been really friendly, on the whole. (Or, if they have been un-friendly, it had nothing to do with me being American and more to do with....them not being a friendly type person).
I've actually really benefited from the friendliness, as it hugely eased the transition because I started to feel more and more comfortable with the gaffs I made because I didn't know what to do.  All I have to do is open my mouth and I have a ready-made excuse for why I didn't know what I was doing!
With regards to the history, I come from a slightly different viewpoint as much of my history was learned from my father (huge history buff) and various of his family members. We lost family in the concentration camps in WWII so that history was both deeply personal and seen as something that family members *had* to learn about to understand how my family ended up where it did, and I vividly remember "what if" descriptions going around the dinner table about the US entering the war earlier. That's not to say that they weren't (very) impressed with the US war efforts, but it was a topic of discussion.