Well what a surprise... . .
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 susmik  PLYMOUTH -But Made in Old Coulsdon... 10 Aug 17 5.07pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
All the issues raised here can be traced back to being the consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism. Yep agreed and Tony Blair has a lot to answer for on many accounts!
Supported Palace for over 69 years since the age of 7 and have seen all the ups and downs and will probably see many more ups and downs before I go up to the big football club in the sky. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 10 Aug 17 5.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Direwolf
But isn't the problem with such an argument that there isn't 'a one of us'? We are riven with cultural, moral, political, ideological, class and economic divisions. The nature of man is to be hypocritical and to embrace contradictions. I agree there isn't an us and them, that's a illusion we create for the ease of understanding our place in the world, there is only me and everyone else. And even then, me is really just a series of ideas, subject to change, that I have at any given point of time. Its not a constant either, I is like a story I'm telling myself.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| richard shaw (og)65 my minds eye 10 Aug 17 5.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Ha Plenty of people in the Commonwealth fought for the UK in the second world war and weren't British. I'm just trying to be mischievous in a thread that has the usual racist load of bollocks going on in it
interviewer " iggy , do you think you influenced anybody?" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
but he didn't metaphorically spill blood for his country, he only played football for England national.| jamiemartin721 Reading 10 Aug 17 5.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rubin
What it's certainly not is FGM, death for apostasy, honour killings, death for/criminalising homosexuality, segregation of genders etc. Well that's a start. I agree with that as a good starting point and its easier to define what is British by what its not, rather than what it is. Although we do segregate the genders (admittedly not to the extent your alluding to), and plenty of those who claim to be British would also determine the genders to be male and female.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 10 Aug 17 5.19pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by richard shaw (og)65
terry butcher was born in singapore and he literally spilt blood for his country Yeah, because like Gower he was English. It's not where you are born it's the family culture you grow up in.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 10 Aug 17 5.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Well that's a start. I agree with that as a good starting point and its easier to define what is British by what its not, rather than what it is. Although we do segregate the genders (admittedly not to the extent your alluding to), and plenty of those who claim to be British would also determine the genders to be male and female. Interesting...would you determine genders other than that....I suppose there is intersex...which is very rare but other than that? I can't for the life of me.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 10 Aug 17 5.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by richard shaw (og)65
I'm just trying to be mischievous in a thread that has the usual racist load of bollocks going on in it Don't be so hard on yourself.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 10 Aug 17 5.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Its more because I've been around this a few times and can't come to a fairer definition. So how do we ascertain who the majority are? And why assume that by default any minority is not British, because they hold different views, opinions and attitudes - doesn't that inform the cultural development of what is British. And how do you ascertain what the majority perceives, thinks or feels - What if in some areas, you're aligned with the majority view, and others your not. Most people probably think they're in the majority (I don't, by experience I think I'm a minority on a lot of things). But of course having a minority view or perception, doesn't mean that your wrong either - This history of British Law is full of incidents in which the rational argument, despite being unpopular, wins out, and becomes the British Norm. Wouldn't they be English and working class, which seems a bit unfair to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as the overseas British citizens such as the Falkland Islanders - as they're immediately outside the majority, in their own nation. What I'm saying, is that the term British in terms of values and culture, gets used a lot, but cannot be reasonably quantified - without accepting irrational values. So how British is defined is probably a personal perception but I would assert that when enough people have a similar one, accepting a degree of variation, then that is what 'British' is in any real sense. It cannot have fixed clearly defined criteria but is subject to a filter of what is and isn't acceptable within the definition based on a loose consensus.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 10 Aug 17 5.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Interesting...would you determine genders other than that....I suppose there is intersex...which is very rare but other than that? I can't for the life of me. I'd include Transgender in there (given that there is sufficient biological and medical evidence of physiological differences seen in neuro-chemistry of trans and their determined gender - and on the social reporting, that people who transition have from a very young age been aware that they weren't 'actually' their gender. I know it sounds like liberal wishy washy - but there is a lot of evidence that in most cases of gender dymorphia (I think its called) that there is are biologically differences between the norm for that gender group. And maybe Asexual - which is really strange when you get beneath the surface view of what people think it. And then androgenous - Which I guess is probably covered by intersex, but maybe slightly different.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 10 Aug 17 5.41pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
So how British is defined is probably a personal perception but I would assert that when enough people have a similar one, accepting a degree of variation, then that is what 'British' is in any real sense. It cannot have fixed clearly defined criteria but is subject to a filter of what is and isn't acceptable within the definition based on a loose consensus. But that doesn't mean they're correct, just because they're more of them, each idea of what is British even views that are anti-British, is part of the social discourse that determines British. Even the view of people who aren't British, influence those discourses. But I think that we'd all agree that their a hypothetical idea that being British exists, its just empherial in terms of definition, because it exists as a series of social discourses that we're all involved in. Like I said in the different response the best way of defining hypothetical concepts is to determine what they are not.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 10 Aug 17 5.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Direwolf
But isn't the problem with such an argument that there isn't 'a one of us'? We are riven with cultural, moral, political, ideological, class and economic divisions. That's true, but in a world where most of us are concerned mostly with self interest then all the while coexistence is mutually beneficial then people will live side by side as a nation. If one group or individual is deemed to run counter to that mutual interest then they are not desirable entities.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| topcat Holmesdale / Surbiton 10 Aug 17 5.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
There was a video of Indian and pakistani fans, in an English city (I can't remember which one) fighting (hand-bags) after a cricket match. When a few plastic chairs were luzzed I knew that they had embraced English culture.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.