On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:31:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Well of course there isn't. I might identify with greek culture, 
>cricket, rugby, not beer, dont like tea, or football..Im not CofE, or 
>anything at all, most near a sort of neo pagan..I mean what IS this 
>elusive english culture?

Like I've said before, there isn't anything anyone can call English.

Airstrip One is just an anonymous island full of diverse immigrants
with nothing in common all milling around in a cultural/historical
vacuum.

I mean, just take someone who calls himself English and plop him down
anywhere in the world and if you met him you wouldn't be able to tell
the difference between him and the locals because wherever he might be
everybody around would be just as English as he is. 

Svenne

Svenne wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:31:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Well of course there isn't. I might identify with greek culture, 
>> cricket, rugby, not beer, dont like tea, or football..Im not CofE, or 
>> anything at all, most near a sort of neo pagan..I mean what IS this 
>> elusive english culture?
> 
> Like I've said before, there isn't anything anyone can call English.
> 
> Airstrip One is just an anonymous island full of diverse immigrants
> with nothing in common all milling around in a cultural/historical
> vacuum.
> 
> I mean, just take someone who calls himself English and plop him down
> anywhere in the world and if you met him you wouldn't be able to tell
> the difference between him and the locals because wherever he might be
> everybody around would be just as English as he is. 
> 
> Svenne

During the second world war I do not think that the English would have 
had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were reasonably 
good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  If the 
English can recognise the English what does it matter if others cannot? 
  If there are people purporting to be English who cannot identify the 
English perhaps they should be living somewhere else.  From all that 
perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify an Englishman perhaps 
you are not one or the other person is not one either.

R

Roger Dewhurst wrote:
> Svenne wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:31:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Well of course there isn't. I might identify with greek culture, 
>>> cricket, rugby, not beer, dont like tea, or football..Im not CofE, or 
>>> anything at all, most near a sort of neo pagan..I mean what IS this 
>>> elusive english culture?
>>
>> Like I've said before, there isn't anything anyone can call English.
>>
>> Airstrip One is just an anonymous island full of diverse immigrants
>> with nothing in common all milling around in a cultural/historical
>> vacuum.
>>
>> I mean, just take someone who calls himself English and plop him down
>> anywhere in the world and if you met him you wouldn't be able to tell
>> the difference between him and the locals because wherever he might be
>> everybody around would be just as English as he is.
>> Svenne
> 
> During the second world war I do not think that the English would have 
> had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were reasonably 
> good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  If the 
> English can recognise the English what does it matter if others cannot? 
>  If there are people purporting to be English who cannot identify the 
> English perhaps they should be living somewhere else.  From all that 
> perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify an Englishman perhaps 
> you are not one or the other person is not one either.
> 
> R

I think the English can still identify the English.
That's what the Left hates.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Roger Dewhurst wrote:
>> Svenne wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:31:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well of course there isn't. I might identify with greek culture, 
>>>> cricket, rugby, not beer, dont like tea, or football..Im not CofE, 
>>>> or anything at all, most near a sort of neo pagan..I mean what IS 
>>>> this elusive english culture?
>>>
>>> Like I've said before, there isn't anything anyone can call English.
>>>
>>> Airstrip One is just an anonymous island full of diverse immigrants
>>> with nothing in common all milling around in a cultural/historical
>>> vacuum.
>>>
>>> I mean, just take someone who calls himself English and plop him down
>>> anywhere in the world and if you met him you wouldn't be able to tell
>>> the difference between him and the locals because wherever he might be
>>> everybody around would be just as English as he is.
>>> Svenne
>>
>> During the second world war I do not think that the English would have 
>> had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were 
>> reasonably good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  
>> If the English can recognise the English what does it matter if others 
>> cannot?  If there are people purporting to be English who cannot 
>> identify the English perhaps they should be living somewhere else.  
>> From all that perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify an 
>> Englishman perhaps you are not one or the other person is not one either.
>>
>> R
> 
> I think the English can still identify the English.
> That's what the Left hates.
> 

Not just the English. Take me for example - strong Italian heritage, 
possibly some Arabic, and a Celtic mother (no genes expressed). Raised 
by English grandparents, thought I was English, never even questioned 
it.  Even after years of being picked on, it wasn't until I met someone 
from this newsgroup (when I was in my 30's) and they told me how foreign 
I look, that the penny dropped and I realised that I don't visually fit 
in. I had a crisis of confidence and started over some years to explore 
other cultures to see if I was a better fit there, and I wasn't. It 
forced me to make a conscious decision (something maybe other people 
haven't done or had to do). Over the past 10 years I have come to 
understand that I am 'English' because I feel that I  belong to *this* 
culture, not anywhere else, not even any other white country. I am 
certain that there are many other people of foreign descent who would 
name this culture as theirs, rather than that of any roots they have 
(even if they acknowledge and celebrate their alternative roots). The 
number of those who are opposed to or care nothing for our cultural 
identity as a nation of people is now out of control and quite scary, 
scary because so many of them are white English people.
Who is 'English'? In my humble opinion, anyone who would defend English 
culture in order to protect it.

Maria wrote:
> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>> Roger Dewhurst wrote:
>>> Svenne wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:31:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well of course there isn't. I might identify with greek culture, 
>>>>> cricket, rugby, not beer, dont like tea, or football..Im not CofE, 
>>>>> or anything at all, most near a sort of neo pagan..I mean what IS 
>>>>> this elusive english culture?
>>>>
>>>> Like I've said before, there isn't anything anyone can call English.
>>>>
>>>> Airstrip One is just an anonymous island full of diverse immigrants
>>>> with nothing in common all milling around in a cultural/historical
>>>> vacuum.
>>>>
>>>> I mean, just take someone who calls himself English and plop him down
>>>> anywhere in the world and if you met him you wouldn't be able to tell
>>>> the difference between him and the locals because wherever he might be
>>>> everybody around would be just as English as he is.
>>>> Svenne
>>>
>>> During the second world war I do not think that the English would 
>>> have had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were 
>>> reasonably good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  
>>> If the English can recognise the English what does it matter if 
>>> others cannot?  If there are people purporting to be English who 
>>> cannot identify the English perhaps they should be living somewhere 
>>> else.  From all that perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify 
>>> an Englishman perhaps you are not one or the other person is not one 
>>> either.
>>>
>>> R
>>
>> I think the English can still identify the English.
>> That's what the Left hates.
>>
> 
> Not just the English. Take me for example - strong Italian heritage, 
> possibly some Arabic, and a Celtic mother (no genes expressed). Raised 
> by English grandparents, thought I was English, never even questioned 
> it.  Even after years of being picked on, it wasn't until I met someone 
> from this newsgroup (when I was in my 30's) and they told me how foreign 
> I look, that the penny dropped and I realised that I don't visually fit 
> in. I had a crisis of confidence and started over some years to explore 
> other cultures to see if I was a better fit there, and I wasn't. It 
> forced me to make a conscious decision (something maybe other people 
> haven't done or had to do). Over the past 10 years I have come to 
> understand that I am 'English' because I feel that I  belong to *this* 
> culture, not anywhere else, not even any other white country. I am 
> certain that there are many other people of foreign descent who would 
> name this culture as theirs, rather than that of any roots they have 
> (even if they acknowledge and celebrate their alternative roots). The 
> number of those who are opposed to or care nothing for our cultural 
> identity as a nation of people is now out of control and quite scary, 
> scary because so many of them are white English people.
> Who is 'English'? In my humble opinion, anyone who would defend English 
> culture in order to protect it.

I had a similar school experience because I too did not look totally 
English - a bit too blond and Germanic, esp back then. I still don't, 
but not so many people consciously recognise the fact these days.


-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:53:30 +1300, Roger Dewhurst
 wrote:

>During the second world war I do not think that the English would have 
>had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were reasonably 
>good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  If the 
>English can recognise the English what does it matter if others cannot? 
>  If there are people purporting to be English who cannot identify the 
>English perhaps they should be living somewhere else.  From all that 
>perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify an Englishman perhaps 
>you are not one or the other person is not one either.

If those confused souls who not only cannot tell what English is but
deny the very existence of such a thing went to live in Spain or
Zimbabwe or Outer Mongolia or somewhere they would have a hard job
figuring out they were not in England because everybody around them
would be exactly the same as where they came from. They would have to
check on a GPS or something, but at least they wouldn't get homesick.

Svenne

On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:55:00 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
 wrote:

>> During the second world war I do not think that the English would have 
>> had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were reasonably 
>> good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  If the 
>> English can recognise the English what does it matter if others cannot? 
>>  If there are people purporting to be English who cannot identify the 
>> English perhaps they should be living somewhere else.  From all that 
>> perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify an Englishman perhaps 
>> you are not one or the other person is not one either.

>I think the English can still identify the English.
>That's what the Left hates.

Give 'em time, they're working on it.

Svenne

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:09:53 +0100, Maria 
wrote:

>Not just the English. Take me for example - strong Italian heritage, 
>possibly some Arabic, and a Celtic mother (no genes expressed). Raised 
>by English grandparents, thought I was English, never even questioned 
>it.  Even after years of being picked on, it wasn't until I met someone 
>from this newsgroup (when I was in my 30's) and they told me how foreign 
>I look, that the penny dropped and I realised that I don't visually fit 
>in. I had a crisis of confidence and started over some years to explore 
>other cultures to see if I was a better fit there, and I wasn't. It 
>forced me to make a conscious decision (something maybe other people 
>haven't done or had to do). Over the past 10 years I have come to 
>understand that I am 'English' because I feel that I  belong to *this* 
>culture, not anywhere else, not even any other white country. I am 
>certain that there are many other people of foreign descent who would 
>name this culture as theirs, rather than that of any roots they have 
>(even if they acknowledge and celebrate their alternative roots). The 
>number of those who are opposed to or care nothing for our cultural 
>identity as a nation of people is now out of control and quite scary, 
>scary because so many of them are white English people.
>Who is 'English'? In my humble opinion, anyone who would defend English 
>culture in order to protect it.

There you have it, that is just what English is.

It has nothing to do with genes, race, skin colour or any other
physical attribute. It is personal identification with a
cultural/historical continuity.

It's a pity so many people deny there is such a thing, England and the
English were nice while they existed. A pearl amongst nations.

Sorry about that last bit of chauvinistic drum beating, it must make
me a Nazi racist xenophobe or something.

Svenne

Svenne wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:53:30 +1300, Roger Dewhurst
>  wrote:
> 
>> During the second world war I do not think that the English would have 
>> had any problem identifying themselves as English.  They were reasonably 
>> good too at identifying Germans pretending to be English.  If the 
>> English can recognise the English what does it matter if others cannot? 
>>  If there are people purporting to be English who cannot identify the 
>> English perhaps they should be living somewhere else.  From all that 
>> perhaps we can conclude, if you cannot identify an Englishman perhaps 
>> you are not one or the other person is not one either.
> 
> If those confused souls who not only cannot tell what English is but
> deny the very existence of such a thing went to live in Spain or
> Zimbabwe or Outer Mongolia or somewhere they would have a hard job
> figuring out they were not in England because everybody around them
> would be exactly the same as where they came from. They would have to
> check on a GPS or something, but at least they wouldn't get homesick.
> 
> Svenne
You dont think speaking e.g. Spanish would be more of a give-away than 
the three heads on the dogs then?

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Svenne wrote:
>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:36:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> You dont think speaking e.g. Spanish would be more of a give-away than 
>>> the three heads on the dogs then?

>> Perhaps he wouldn't recognise Spanish, perhaps he might think it was 
>> Urdu or Punjabi or any of the other English languages spoken by the 
>> English in England. 

>English is what English people speak.

I find you most often speak Gobbledygook.

Anyway, not so long ago you were arguing that there was no such thing
as an English identity. Now it seems you claim there is but so far
with only one attribute.

According to the Confused Philisopher an English person is a person
who speaks English. A quick Google shows that would make 1.8 billion
English people in the world.

Fancy that, according to our Philosopher friend, there are more
English in the world than Chinese. Especially since a lot of those
Chinese can speak English and are therefore really English.

I hope they don't come home to the mother country all at once, it
would get a bit crowded.

Svenne

Svenne wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Svenne wrote:
>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:36:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You dont think speaking e.g. Spanish would be more of a give-away than 
>>>> the three heads on the dogs then?
> 
>>> Perhaps he wouldn't recognise Spanish, perhaps he might think it was 
>>> Urdu or Punjabi or any of the other English languages spoken by the 
>>> English in England. 
> 
>> English is what English people speak.
> 
> I find you most often speak Gobbledygook.
> 
> Anyway, not so long ago you were arguing that there was no such thing
> as an English identity. Now it seems you claim there is but so far
> with only one attribute.
> 

and identity is not a definition. The definition of an english person is 
either one who is born in England, or one who speaks english as a first 
language perhaps. Beyond that is has no precise meaning.

> According to the Confused Philisopher an English person is a person
> who speaks English. A quick Google shows that would make 1.8 billion
> English people in the world.
> 

No, they do'nt speak English as a first language, nor were they born in 
England.

Twsiting my words to suit your argument, shows its innate paucity.


> Fancy that, according to our Philosopher friend, there are more
> English in the world than Chinese. Especially since a lot of those
> Chinese can speak English and are therefore really English.
> 
> I hope they don't come home to the mother country all at once, it
> would get a bit crowded.
> 

I wish some of them would. They are darn sight more civilised than half 
the descendants of william the conqueror who littter our housing estates.
> Svenne
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 16:27:04 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Svenne wrote:
>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Svenne wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:36:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You dont think speaking e.g. Spanish would be more of a give-away than 
>>>>> the three heads on the dogs then?
>> 
>>>> Perhaps he wouldn't recognise Spanish, perhaps he might think it was 
>>>> Urdu or Punjabi or any of the other English languages spoken by the 
>>>> English in England. 
>> 
>>> English is what English people speak.
>> 
>> I find you most often speak Gobbledygook.
>> 
>> Anyway, not so long ago you were arguing that there was no such thing
>> as an English identity. Now it seems you claim there is but so far
>> with only one attribute.

>and identity is not a definition. The definition of an english person is 
>either one who is born in England, or one who speaks english as a first 
>language perhaps. Beyond that is has no precise meaning.

An interesting theory you have there, fancy George Bush and Barak
Obama and 200 million other inhabitants of the land across the pond
really being English. Not to mention all those people living in
Canada, Australia and New Zealand, all of them English to a man
according to our nutty Philosopher. 

Not quite 1.8 billion, but it would still be very crowded in the
mother country if they all came home at once.

And what if a Bhutanese or Outer Mongolian mother gave birth to a baby
in London airport while heading for home?  According to your
philosophising her unsuspecting issue would really be English despite
the entire family not having a word of English between them and the
unsuspecting sprog growing up in Ulan Bator not even knowing that
England exists.

>> According to the Confused Philisopher an English person is a person
>> who speaks English. A quick Google shows that would make 1.8 billion
>> English people in the world.

>No, they do'nt speak English as a first language, nor were they born in 
>England.

>Twsiting my words to suit your argument, shows its innate paucity.

Ah, but now you are modifying your philosophical theories. Your not
much of a philosopher if you have to make stuff up on the fly. First
you claimed that just speaking English was all that was required in
order for a person to be English, now you claim that English has to be
the persons first language. You can hardly accuse others of word
twisting when the only twists here are in your knickers.

And you're a nasty little xenophobe and racist too. Claiming that all
those hard working immigrants who have been living in England for
decades and who's first language isn't English aren't English. Quite a
repulsive bigot you are, Mr. Philosopher.

Svenne

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:36:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>You dont think speaking e.g. Spanish would be more of a give-away than 
>the three heads on the dogs then?

Perhaps he wouldn't recognise Spanish, perhaps he might think it was 
Urdu or Punjabi or any of the other English languages spoken by the 
English in England. 

Svenne

Svenne wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:36:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> You dont think speaking e.g. Spanish would be more of a give-away than 
>> the three heads on the dogs then?
> 
> Perhaps he wouldn't recognise Spanish, perhaps he might think it was 
> Urdu or Punjabi or any of the other English languages spoken by the 
> English in England. 
> 

English is what English people speak.

By definition.

They may speak other languages. I am quite fluent in C, PHP and French, 
but that doesn't mean those are english languages.


> Svenne 
> 
> 
>