Freggyragh Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 The English language isn’t ‘British’ (aka Welsh) it’s a mixture of French and German. The Church of England isn’t a British Church (that would be Druidism or the Celtic Church) it is a German / Swiss offshoot of an Italian church. The English Royal Family probably have a bit of ‘British’ blood, but probably more German, Dutch and French. England was in a Union with parts of France after 1066 for nearly 500 years. The United Kingdom has only existed for 312 years, 218 if you include the North of Ireland. The Bill of Rights was enacted by a Parliament presided over by a Dutch king. The Act of Union was enforced by s succession of German monarchs. This ‘British’ exceptionality you imagine is bollocks. Britain, in particular, England, is European to the core. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 13 hours ago, woolley said: This minor subplot to the thread arose when Manxman questioned whether the UK has any more legitimacy to survive as a union than does the EU. My answers were posted entirely in that context and I persist in my assertion that the population of the British Islands (present day UK & Ireland) are a people with an almost homogenous cohesion that embraces many, many generations. It has been nurtured through their inter-island travel, trading, intermarriage (even during internecine warring) and many other common bonds for over a millennium. The come lately EU, by contrast, stretches across a continent of disparate peoples with far less in common than have the British. Hardly surprising given the geopolitical overreach of the project.. I agree that the EU is a modern construct, however, the European people are not. I stand by my assertion that the "British" are not as isolated and homogeneous as you make out. I stand by my assertion that if your argument is sovereignty then the nations which make up the UK should also have a right to a sovereign Government rather than being ruled over by Westminster. I find it interesting that many who campaigned against Scotland leaving the UK also campaigned for the UK to leave the EU. Don't even get me started on those who said that if Scotland left the UK it would have to leave the EU which was not in its interests... There is so much hypocrisy and personal power plays going on that the interests of the general population are being forgotten and trampled on. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 On 6/14/2019 at 2:26 PM, RIchard Britten said: And how would you define this "distinct" British Identity? Should ask someone who live in London, Birmingham, St Ives or York? Maybe someone in their 20's, 50's or 80's? Someone Caucasian, Black or Asian? Someone who grew up on a council estate, in the suburbs or in Kensington? @woolley care to respond to my question in relation to your assertion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 On 6/17/2019 at 10:11 PM, Freggyragh said: The English language isn’t ‘British’ (aka Welsh) it’s a mixture of French and German. The Church of England isn’t a British Church (that would be Druidism or the Celtic Church) it is a German / Swiss offshoot of an Italian church. The English Royal Family probably have a bit of ‘British’ blood, but probably more German, Dutch and French. England was in a Union with parts of France after 1066 for nearly 500 years. The United Kingdom has only existed for 312 years, 218 if you include the North of Ireland. The Bill of Rights was enacted by a Parliament presided over by a Dutch king. The Act of Union was enforced by s succession of German monarchs. This ‘British’ exceptionality you imagine is bollocks. Britain, in particular, England, is European to the core. You don’t seem to realise that the more aspects you list to attempt to knock it down, the more compellingly accurate my reasoning becomes. The politics of union or the longevity of the UK don’t matter. It is the human state of being British in mind and deed as opposed to being anything else that counts. We have already debunked the fallacy of mass migration to Britain over the centuries. In 1851 the proportion of the population born abroad was 0.6%. It had been largely stable and homogenous for centuries. Of course the British identity and the English language borrowed fundamentals from all and sundry in antiquity and the Middle Ages. All of these constituent parts were blended with the indigenous character and eventually yielded the culture we have built over the centuries. This is what makes it such a formidable phenomenon. As it developed its own identity, it gradually became more and more discrete from its origins. To deny that British culture is different from all of those ancient European influences and traditions is akin to saying that the higher apes are in no way distinct from the primordial soup from which they emerged or other species that evolved in parallel. “With Europe, but not of it.” is a famous Churchillian quote. Perhaps we could make a case for “of, but not with.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_immigration_to_Great_Britain https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/48 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 On 6/18/2019 at 8:52 AM, RIchard Britten said: @woolley care to respond to my question in relation to your assertion? This does rather postdate the discussion we have been having concerning the establishment and development of the identity over more than a thousand years. Many of the ethnic minorities you speak of have arrived in numbers in the last 70 years which is the blink of an eye in long term demographics. As far as it goes though, I know for certain that black and Asian communities do indeed have a British identity reaching back to their empire antecedents, although perhaps many of them cleave to their lands of origin more than earlier arrivals, as illustrated by the practice of returning to the homeland for a marriage partner. It takes time, and lots of it. It is more complex and too early to judge in the case of Muslims who have arrived in such large numbers over a very short time, and with such strong religious beliefs that transcend allegiance to any state culture, that a high proportion look to their imams before British values. Interesting times. There is a decided haves and have nots dimension in Britain today. This is one of the stresses being exploited by those who would undermine our unity and we ignore it at our peril. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 The point we are making is that the population of these islands has historically not been homogeneous. It was not all that long ago that Irish workers were vilified in Britain but now you would seem happy to state that the Irish somehow share in a British culture. That will probably be news to a lot of people living in Ireland. Your argument is weak and full of rhetoric which is not historically accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 (edited) 51 minutes ago, manxman1980 said: The point we are making is that the population of these islands has historically not been homogeneous. It was not all that long ago that Irish workers were vilified in Britain but now you would seem happy to state that the Irish somehow share in a British culture. That will probably be news to a lot of people living in Ireland. Your argument is weak and full of rhetoric which is not historically accurate. Rhetoric? On the contrary, it is entirely accurate. We are not talking politics here. A good proportion of us have Irish ancestors even though we don't identify as Irish. That's undeniable? If I go to Dublin it feels much as any other city elsewhere in the British Isles archipelago, and the people live their lives with similar habits to those in Britain. As for the population not being homogenous, I gave you the figures. 0.6% foreign born in the mid 1800s, and well assimilated. How much more homogenous can it be? (Unless we built a wall after the Romans left!). Irish vilified in Britain? Means nothing. Southerners vilify Northerners and vice versa. Yorkshire vilifies Lancashire, even fought wars! And don't get me started about Scots versus English. Hasn't stopped them living together working together, breeding together. Edited June 21, 2019 by woolley 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freggyragh Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 So, Dublin, which is quite definitely in the EU by the way, feels little different to you than any British city. And that’s your argument for brexit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 3 hours ago, Freggyragh said: So, Dublin, which is quite definitely in the EU by the way, feels little different to you than any British city. And that’s your argument for brexit? You're making it up again. How on Earth do you arrive at that? Your quantum leaps become more spectacular with every installment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 Made me smile: 5 hours ago, woolley said: You don’t seem to realise that the more aspects you list to attempt to knock it down, the more compellingly accurate my reasoning becomes. https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/48 And then you post a link to migrationwatchuk! Migration Watch UK! That's as naive as claiming the German Armed Forces are in disarray because Russia Today says they are.... Buried in a Migration Watch report: the truth about immigration! The relationship between Migration Watch and the press is basically that of a conveyer belt. They release an alarming report about how many migrants are coming to the UK, or how much they cost UK taxpayers, and the press treats it like some respectable piece of academic research. But Migration Watch doesn't produce academic research. It produces whatever logical contortion is required to turn facts about immigrants into a weapon to beat them with. They'll say anything, or ignore anything, in order to turn the UK's political debate against migrants. And they always have.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 4 hours ago, woolley said: Irish vilified in Britain? Means nothing. Southerners vilify Northerners and vice versa. Yorkshire vilifies Lancashire, even fought wars! And don't get me started about Scots versus English. Hasn't stopped them living together working together, breeding together. Just think about that for a while... Isn't that much the same as the UKs relationship with Europe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 36 minutes ago, manxman1980 said: Just think about that for a while... Isn't that much the same as the UKs relationship with Europe? In what way? Certainly not insofar as the distinct British character has developed in the British Isles. There is no single European parallel, nor should there be. Spanish and Finnish, for instance. Or Dutch and Italian. Chalk and cheese and all the better for that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 46 minutes ago, P.K. said: Made me smile: And then you post a link to migrationwatchuk! Migration Watch UK! That's as naive as claiming the German Armed Forces are in disarray because Russia Today says they are.... Buried in a Migration Watch report: the truth about immigration! The relationship between Migration Watch and the press is basically that of a conveyer belt. They release an alarming report about how many migrants are coming to the UK, or how much they cost UK taxpayers, and the press treats it like some respectable piece of academic research. But Migration Watch doesn't produce academic research. It produces whatever logical contortion is required to turn facts about immigrants into a weapon to beat them with. They'll say anything, or ignore anything, in order to turn the UK's political debate against migrants. And they always have.... Actually.......... It's as naive as claiming the number of foreigners in Britain was 0.6% of the population in 1851 because, er, the official census confirms it is so! But do persist in your tomfoolery. I knew some eejit would pick up on the Migration Watch link in precisely the way you have, simply because it is Migration Watch. I posted their link for the number of foreigners in the UK in 1851 because it was conveniently laid out with graphics showing subsequent censuses. That is not their figure, it is from the census, obviously. Are you disputing the official census? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 13 minutes ago, woolley said: Actually.......... It's as naive as claiming the number of foreigners in Britain was 0.6% of the population in 1851 because, er, the official census confirms it is so! But do persist in your tomfoolery. I knew some eejit would pick up on the Migration Watch link in precisely the way you have, simply because it is Migration Watch. I posted their link for the number of foreigners in the UK in 1851 because it was conveniently laid out with graphics showing subsequent censuses. That is not their figure, it is from the census, obviously. Are you disputing the official census? What's the foreigners in the uk in 1851 got to do with anything? Errr that'll be nothing then. What you might term trace elements. Naive? Me? Compared to you, a brexiteer. Pah! Migration Watch UK. Dear me. And YOU post a link to them. "I knew some etc etc" - yeah, right..... Expected better.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 1 minute ago, P.K. said: What's the foreigners in the uk in 1851 got to do with anything? Errr that'll be nothing then. What you might term trace elements. Naive? Me? Compared to you, a brexiteer. Pah! Migration Watch UK. Dear me. And YOU post a link to them. "I knew some etc etc" - yeah, right..... Expected better.... Expected better than my total and utter vindication in the face of your spurious query? You are called out and now blathering because the point you made is not a point. I thought it would be you, Freggy or Richard. What the vanishingly small number of foreigners in the UK in 1851 has to do with it, of course, is proof positive of the homogeneity of the population as opposed the the fantasy dreamed up by the liberal elite in recent decades that Britain has always - note ALWAYS - been a melting pot with wave after wave of large scale immigration throughout the centuries. There's no reasoning with you when you're like this. And you're always like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.