there will always be an England, part 2

[Andy H]

Hi pzrmeyer,

The essential issue is the overlap with Britishness. About 80% of Britons live in England, yet the vast majority also have some demonstrable non-English ancestry, most of it Scots, Irish, Welsh or Cornish. More people with Scottish, Irish and Welsh surnames live in England than in any of those countries. As a result, English identity has been more completely subsumed in Britishness than the Scots, Irish or Welsh.

(It is also conveniently overlooked by some nationalist leaders trying to become big fish in small ponds that that high proportions of their own populations have some demonstrable English ancestry. For example, most Lowland Scots are actually of very longstanding English ancestry.)

Cheers,

Sid.

I really dont think the cause of England 's (or Britain's if you prefer) problems stems from the mix percentage of Scots, Irish, Cornish, Welsh, etc.

and the problem(s) is caused by what exactly in your opinion

[Jock]

Lowland Scots, and indeed, the majority of the population, may have a tangible source of English blood in them, true.

Many Scots though, can claim, along with Scandinavian countries, to have a 'relativity' unblemished genetic line.

Cheers,

[pzrmeyer2]

Hi pzrmeyer,

The essential issue is the overlap with Britishness. About 80% of Britons live in England, yet the vast majority also have some demonstrable non-English ancestry, most of it Scots, Irish, Welsh or Cornish. More people with Scottish, Irish and Welsh surnames live in England than in any of those countries. As a result, English identity has been more completely subsumed in Britishness than the Scots, Irish or Welsh.

(It is also conveniently overlooked by some nationalist leaders trying to become big fish in small ponds that that high proportions of their own populations have some demonstrable English ancestry. For example, most Lowland Scots are actually of very longstanding English ancestry.)

Cheers,

Sid.

I really dont think the cause of England 's (or Britain's if you prefer) problems stems from the mix percentage of Scots, Irish, Cornish, Welsh, etc.

and the problem(s) is caused by what exactly in your opinion

you first

[Andy H]

Well I did ask first, so please

Regards

[pzrmeyer2]

Well I did ask first, so please

Regards

c'mon toughguy. Show some onions. live up to your little tagline. Given the frothing at the mouth you and your fellow travellers display every time I post, you can't accuse me of not taking a position. So tell me, tell us, what do you feel are the causes for the general dismay in your splendid little island?

[Andy H]

Well I did ask first, so please

Regards

c'mon toughguy. Show some onions. live up to your little tagline. Given the frothing at the mouth you and your fellow travellers display every time I post, you can't accuse me of not taking a position. So tell me, tell us, what do you feel are the causes for the general dismay in your splendid little island?

Jeez its pantomine season so:-

The 'problems' of our splendid little island are in many ways the same as your and no doubt others to a lesser or greater extent.

Inability of the Politicians to engage the Public interest.
Power of the Media.
Cost of Living.
Immigration, illegal or otherwise
The EU.
Political Correctness.
Multiculturism
Percieved or real inequalities within society, and the constituent countries therin.
Our place in the world in regards to Foreign policy

Over to you

Regards

[phylo_roadking]

There's nothing wrong with the UK, its a WONDERFUL place to live. Our supermarket shelves are now groaning with all sorts of fantastic Eastern European canned and bottled goods, meat counters with 101 different kinds of that nice finegrain sausage that sticks so tastily to the gag reflex at the back of your tongue, and when you get to a checkout...ANY checkout anywhere...and get shortchanged you don't have to go through all the rigmarole of questioning it, you can just happily go on your way secure in the knowledge that IF you asked for the correct change the cashier wouldn't understand what you're saying anyway and just grin inanely at you lighting up your whole day...nor do you EVER have to waste your time asking where something is in the said supermarket, because you just KNOW that the answer would be the Polish or Lithuanian equivalent of - "eh?" So you don't waste those precious few minutes of your life and can go and spend them more profitably:D

And that's just 100 yards from my front door. Just THINK how wonderful the new United Kingdom And Co-Citizenship Areas in Europe gets further than the end of my street!

[pzrmeyer2]

Inability of the Politicians to engage the Public interest.
Power of the Media.
Cost of Living.
Immigration, illegal or otherwise
The EU.
Political Correctness.
Multiculturism
Percieved or real inequalities within society, and the constituent countries therin.
Our place in the world in regards to Foreign policy

wow! guess we agree on something. now, how many of those points do you yourself support/condone?

[sid guttridge]

Hi Jock,

The problem is that "relatively unblemished" is not the same as "unblemished". The English, Scots, Irish, Welsh and Cornish are made up of different proportions of the same ethnic roots, not of absolutely distinct peoples. They are all, I would therefore argue "British". this is not an argument against the viability of independence, just against the artificial exclusiveness of our various nationalisms.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Andy H]

Inability of the Politicians to engage the Public interest.
Power of the Media.
Cost of Living.
Immigration, illegal or otherwise
The EU.
Political Correctness.
Multiculturism
Percieved or real inequalities within society, and the constituent countries therin.
Our place in the world in regards to Foreign policy

wow! guess we agree on something. now, how many of those points do you yourself support/condone?

There are no quick and easy one line answers to the points I raised in my opinion. I have issues to a lesser or greater extent within all those areas mentioned.

What I will say is that everyone is so aware of offending anyone about anything, that a angry frustrated apathy is awash within society.

So Eric what are your reasons?, as I have given mine

Regards

[Jock]

Hi Sid,

Think we have discussed this before, eh! I agree with your point that relatively unblemished is different to completely unblemished, but we have discussed before about how virtually no-one can be described as completely unblemished in genetic terms.

But surely you would agree that more isolated, in this case Northern, countries, would, due to location, have suffered less influx of different nationalities in their country, especially pre 1000AD? Surely therefor resulting in a less blemished line than a country such as England, which has had huge numbers of people arriving for many hundreds of years.

I'll use Guam as an example, which was subject to an influx of foreign blood from the mid/late 1600's, and around 200 years of being forced to marry people who were ethnically not Chamorro, along with mass killings, and deaths from strange Euro diseases.

Besides all this, the last full blooded Chamorro died sometime around 1900. So although on a smaller scale, but forced with a much more brutal colonisation than Scotland ever endured, untainted Chamorro blood continued for nearly 250 years, against an active campaign to halt that process.

I'm aware that Scotland's geographical location, and history, and that of Guam's, make for some differences, but I think its a fair point to illustrate my case.

Cheers,

[Jock]

Meant to edit my above post, not quote it...

[sid guttridge]

Hi Jock,

There is no doubt that in the last thousand years Scotland has been more an emigrant than immigrant state and is therefore more homogenous than England (which holds more people of Scotish descent than Scotland itself). The exception being the large influx of Irish into Glasgow and, to a much lesser extent, the Norman origin of much Scottish nobility.

However, I would question whether this means very much. To put the cut off line a thousand years ago is to ignore such significant population movements as the settlement of the Picts in the West, the English in the Lowlands and the Scandinavians up the east coast and in the islands.

All these components are also present in different proportions in England, Wales and Ireland.

There would be a strong degree of artificiality in any claim to ethnic exclusivity in our island nationalisms. Nationalist claims would have to be made on quite other grounds to have reasonable legitimacy, such as Scotland's longstanding legal separateness under existing constitutional arrangements and the increasingly universally recognised right of self determination.

I have no doubt that if Scotland wanted to go its own way that there would be no significant obstacle. But this is of itself an argument for continued Union. If it is not coersive, how is it damaging to Scottish identity, which seems to be rather healthy? And how does it help the even larger number of people of Scottish descent domiciled in England?

Cheers,

Sid.