Brtitsh or English...

[The Year Of The Fox]

English.

I really am quite envious as well of the way that Welsh and Scottish nationalism have become so commonly accepted and mainstream. Stating that you're proud to be English and wish to preserve your English heritage and identity seems to carry connotations for many people, due largely to far-right and mostly English racist groups hijacking the Cross of St. George for decades, something that is still going on with the EDL. English pride is perhaps the least fashionable of all the nationalities within the UK sadly. What is needed is a mainstream, non-racist English nationalist movement, something along the lines of Plaid Cymru and the SNP. I've been saying it for years and probably sound like a stuck record, but until such a movement becomes popular, taking pride in your English heritage will always have unfair labels attached to it.

Obviously such labels are grossly offensive. For all our faults, and I agree there are many and children should be taught the good as well as the bad, England has been a hugely beneficial influence in Western culture. Our literature, our parliamentary system, our politicians and the industrial revolution have all helped shape the modern world. Why shouldn't we celebrate these? There seems to be a culture these days of making English people wear the hair shirt over our history, and this is just as wrong as the Tory government of the 1980s sugarcoating the past and pretending that England's influence was nothing but positive. Now the balance has swung too far in the opposite direction, sullying English patriotism and that to me is a great shame considering England was at the forefront of fighting against fascism, slavery and religious intolerance.

Great post Bilo

[Winchester]

Depends on part of the community you're from over here. Generally Protestants call themselves British and Catholics call themselves Irish.

Nationalism is a pile of wank really. A disperate group of people with different ideals etc are meant to rally round some ethereal conception of unity because geographical location. Doesn't really make any sense.

Indeed, it seems an odd thing for people to get so worked up and aggressive over. If ever I speak of myself being English/British/American etc etc, it is only culturally and not politically.

[The Year Of The Fox]

That's garbage and you know it's garbage, Thracian. Your problem is that "the socialists" (whoever they are) might be proud of different things from you and because of your intolerance you can't accept that.

"The socialists" might be proud of everything English/British from the Peasants' Revolt and the Chartists through the Suffragettes, WW2, the NHS and punk rock to the minimum wage and devolution. Yet because "they" ("the enemy within" - within your paranoid mind, mainly) are not jumping up and down on the Mall in union-jack shorts, shouting "Rule Britannia! Come and reign over me, ma'am!" or propping up saloon bars emitting spittle-flecked bile against Europe, republicans, commies or whoever...they are somehow un-English!

Each to their own. I didn't watch the wedding, partly out of disinterest, but mainly because I was working. My wife and daughter watched it and enjoyed it. I'd like to see a republic some day, but it's something that shouldn't be rushed - you need to be careful what the monarchy is replaced with and how powers are allocated. But Thracian does seem to be someone who wants to define Englishness very narrowly, so as to exclude English people with different ideas from him. Sowing such divisions is not the way forward.

Ironically, it is precisely people like Thracian who make some people question whether they can see themselves as English. I'm English born and bred, from an Irish family, with moderately anarcho-socialist views. However, I'd now describe myself as British (and Irish), not English, precisely because "English" has been hijacked by a bunch of intolerant right-wingers - I don't want to be associated with narrow-minded, divisive, intolerant people like Thracian, Farage and even more unsavoury characters further right.

By definition, "British" includes people - English, Scots, Welsh, Irish, people of recent immigrant descent, left-wingers, right-wingers etc.

Hats off to people who can see "English" as something broader and more generous-minded than Thracian's vision - and to left-wingers like Billy Bragg who are prepared to fight for "English" not to be hijacked by right-wing bigots....maybe I'm just too weak and should stand up to the Thracians of this world!

Surely though thats even more reason to take that 'tag' away from the far right and claim it back as just being proud to be English??

If everyone was worried about being classed as racist when they say 'I'm English' then those who are patriotic will have no identity. I will never ever say I'm British. It doesn't sound right, and to me, its factually incorrect. IMO you are where you were born.

I know of a family that moved to Adelaide who now regard themselves as Australian. To me, thats bollocks. They were born in Leicester! If someone who was born in Pakistan for arguments sake (as being from Leicester its fair to say its relevant) and at the age of 3 months old move over to Englad, to me they're still Pakistani. PLEASE DO NOT SAY THATS RACIST FOR GODS SAKE! The only greyer area IMO is- take my old boss for example- He was born in Germany as his father was serving over there with the British Army. But to me, he is still German!

[FoxyPV]

Unlike nationality being defined through the place of birth, nationalism is based on common history, culture and language(s), so it's not solely geographical. Although I can relate to your opinion that nationalism in many cases makes no sense.

We're arguing shades of grey here but the supposed shared histories and cultures etc are usually based on conflict with the Other - usually a different form of nationalism. My point is that, within somewhere like England, the plethora of different groups, beliefs and behaviours in such a massive population and with very distinct geographical divides, the notion of any nationalism is defunct as when you take away the created identity formed by the state and it's interactions with other states, the shared histories etc do not unite these different regions.

(1) I think an interesting shift is happening: once upon a time, "British" was seen as more imperial, but now it is becoming more inclusive (mixed racial backgrounds accepted) whereas "English" is becoming more exclusive - a bit the preserve of the jingoistic pure-English right. Hopefully the latter won't continue too much.

(2) I went to a lecture once by the Northern Irish loyalist leader David Ervine (RIP); he stressed very strongly that he was British AND Irish (as indeed am I, despite my family being Catholics & Atheists from the Irish Republic...life has more shades than the exclusionists want us to think.... Ervine was an impressive politician, by the way, though his political/cultural background was quite different from mine

Ervine was an absolutely brilliant politician and was able to publicly acknowledge much more than any other politician in this provincial backwater shithole. It's a pity more weren't/ aren't like him. Dawn Purvis is of a similar ilk though.

[FoxyPV]

Surely though thats even more reason to take that 'tag' away from the far right and claim it back as just being proud to be English??

If everyone was worried about being classed as racist when they say 'I'm English' then those who are patriotic will have no identity. I will never ever say I'm British. It doesn't sound right, and to me, its factually incorrect. IMO you are where you were born.

I know of a family that moved to Adelaide who now regard themselves as Australian. To me, thats bollocks. They were born in Leicester! If someone who was born in Pakistan for arguments sake (as being from Leicester its fair to say its relevant) and at the age of 3 months old move over to Englad, to me they're still Pakistani. PLEASE DO NOT SAY THATS RACIST FOR GODS SAKE! The only greyer area IMO is- take my old boss for example- He was born in Germany as his father was serving over there with the British Army. But to me, he is still German!

That's presupposing that where you were born dictates your nationality.

George Boateng was on Goals on Sunday and was asked about not playing for Ghana. He said although he was born in Ghana, he held a dutch passport, grew up, went to school and lived in the Netherlands so considered himself Dutch.

A family may have been born somewhere else but feel more at home in this new culture/ country.

[The Year Of The Fox]

That's presupposing that where you were born dictates your nationality.

George Boateng was on Goals on Sunday and was asked about not playing for Ghana. He said although he was born in Ghana, he held a dutch passport, grew up, went to school and lived in the Netherlands so considered himself Dutch.

A family may have been born somewhere else but feel more at home in this new culture/ country.

Thats how it should be. I know thats an old fashioned view to have but it'd make things much simpler.

Nothing to do with Holland being a better side then?! No in all seriousness, you shouldn't be given that option. Its nothing against anyone at all. Bit of a side issue but I'm very glad the FA ruled that the likes of Almunia and Arteta couldn't play for England

[Winchester]

(1) I think an interesting shift is happening: once upon a time, "British" was seen as more imperial, but now it is becoming more inclusive (mixed racial backgrounds accepted) whereas "English" is becoming more exclusive - a bit the preserve of the jingoistic pure-English right. Hopefully the latter won't continue too much.

(2) I went to a lecture once by the Northern Irish loyalist leader David Ervine (RIP); he stressed very strongly that he was British AND Irish (as indeed am I, despite my family being Catholics & Atheists from the Irish Republic...life has more shades than the exclusionists want us to think.... Ervine was an impressive politician, by the way, though his political/cultural background was quite different from mine

I often wondered what white, british isles immigrants to places such as pakistan or india called themselves? Would their children born in pakistan automatically call themselves pakistani? Would indigenous pakistanis view them as british?

In america some races and heritages are distinct enough to stay with a person even if they're third or fourth generation American (ie italians of new york, mexicans, chinese, japanese, hmong etc etc). But if you stood them next to a full-blooded native Italian,Mexican etc you'd probably revert back to calling them American. I guess it's all a matter of context.

So I wonder too if most Irish (Republic) view the people of Northern Ireland as Irish or British or Northern Irish? - or a mix of all three?

[FoxyPV]

I often wondered what white, british isles immigrants to places such as pakistan or india called themselves? Would their children born in pakistan automatically call themselves pakistani? Would indigenous pakistanis view them as british?

In america some races and heritages are distinct enough to stay with a person even if they're third or fourth generation American (ie italians of new york, mexicans, chinese, japanese, hmong etc etc). But if you stood them next to a full-blooded native Italian,Mexican etc you'd probably revert back to calling them American. I guess it's all a matter of context.

So I wonder too if most Irish (Republic) view the people of Northern Ireland as Irish or British or Northern Irish? - or a mix of all three?

Usually Irish but accept the fact that some see themselves as British. It's funny being in the South sometimes, especially when you tell people you're from the North as some people don't know how to react.

That's one of the things that pisses me of about Americans - when you hear people say I'm part Dutch my family came over in the 1750s - **** off.

[Iwan is a Welshman]

1. Leicestershire and England. I'm immensely proud. It really bothers me that symbols of English identity have been stolen by the far right.

2. British. I'm proud to be British, but that's only second to being English.

3. Europe. Just think it's a sensible idea. Not necessarily proud to be European.

Those who have suggested that our failure to teach the atrocities we committed during the empire are bang on. A balanced perspective should be offered. Essentially that whilst we were powerful enough to conquer the globe, and that was in some respects an achievement when considered in the context of the era, the way we did it and some of the things we did whilst in charge we're no different to the actions of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and so on. However, it should also be mentioned that after about 400 years we realised the error of our ways, and that we should be proud of some of our actions since then. It's no lie that, constitutionally, this country has something to be proud of and that we are the envy of vast proportions of the globe.

[acooling08]

Acooling is just a thick, xenophobic child. Even the FT right don't bother defending his views.

Was tongue in cheek you thick cvnt.

[Winchester]

That's presupposing that where you were born dictates your nationality.

George Boateng was on Goals on Sunday and was asked about not playing for Ghana. He said although he was born in Ghana, he held a dutch passport, grew up, went to school and lived in the Netherlands so considered himself Dutch.

A family may have been born somewhere else but feel more at home in this new culture/ country.

It's a curious point. I see a distinction between nationality and cultural identity. Somebody in that situation with a 50/50 claim to two different nationalities has the right to choose which culture they identify with more.

If it went simply based on where you were born, a lot of historical and popular English figures would actually be considered Indian (like Darjeeling born Vivien Leigh) or Kenyan, Irish, Jamaican etc or perhaps German if parents were in the military, for example.

[Winchester]

Usually Irish but accept the fact that some see themselves as British. It's funny being in the South sometimes, especially when you tell people you're from the North as some people don't know how to react.

That's one of the things that pisses me of about Americans - when you hear people say I'm part Dutch my family came over in the 1750s - **** off.

Haha, which is exactly why the most I'll ever claim is that my family is English. Last thing I need is people calling me a plastic limey! doh!

Personally, I put a lot of stock in the "three generations to make a gentleman" principle and apply that to nationality. So do the passport people, apparently.

Btw you should see how many 'irish' people are over here. Lovely Irish pubs - the fiddle music on the stereo, the shamrocks on the wall and the Boston Red Sox game on the tv lets you know it's an "authentic Irish experience"

[shen]

Thats how it should be. I know thats an old fashioned view to have but it'd make things much simpler.

Nothing to do with Holland being a better side then?! No in all seriousness, you shouldn't be given that option. Its nothing against anyone at all. Bit of a side issue but I'm very glad the FA ruled that the likes of Almunia and Arteta couldn't play for England

I strongly disagree. Why should you be bound to the place of birth, a place you can have absolutely no relation too? Surely people should be free to change nationality and be accepted as such if they do it in a correct manner. Obviously I'm very biased in this as I myself have a different citizenship to my nationality and I don't see myself changing citizenship to the country of my birth any time in the future.

[Finnegan]

Was tongue in cheek you thick cvnt.

If this is in jest, then it's hardly funny

[The Year Of The Fox]

I strongly disagree. Why should you be bound to the place of birth, a place you can have absolutely no relation too? Surely people should be free to change nationality and be accepted as such if they do it in a correct manner. Obviously I'm very biased in this as I myself have a different citizenship to my nationality and I don't see myself changing citizenship to the country of my birth any time in the future.

Thats my point, it shouldn't be down to choice. It'd make viewing immigration statistics, and immigrants' status' much easier to distinguish. Though someone may have no connections where they were born is, to me, irrelevant. If I was born in another country, I would be proud of it. It doesn't mean to say that someone cannot live in another country.

[shen]

Thats my point, it shouldn't be down to choice. It'd make viewing immigration statistics, and immigrants' status' much easier to distinguish. Though someone may have no connections where they were born is, to me, irrelevant. If I was born in another country, I would be proud of it. It doesn't mean to say that someone cannot live in another country.

So you'd ditch nationality changes solely to make immigration statistics easier to distinguish? What kind of reasoning is that? Of course you could be proud to be born in another country, but clearly you weren't. If you were born in Istanbul but lived the bulk of your life in England. You feel English, you speak fluent English, you've got English friends, support the English national team, you're an employee in an English firm, but because of your Turkish nationality you will be treated as a 'second rate' citizen, i.e. you will be held at arms length from the 'real' English, not be able to get the same benefits that 'real' English people do, despite the only thing setting you apart from the rest is that you were born outside of English borders... Does that seem logical or fair?

[The Year Of The Fox]

So you'd ditch nationality changes solely to make immigration statistics easier to distinguish? What kind of reasoning is that? Of course you could be proud to be born in another country, but clearly you weren't. If you were born in Istanbul but lived the bulk of your life in England. You feel English, you speak fluent English, you've got English friends, support the English national team, you're an employee in an English firm, but because of your Turkish nationality you will be treated as a 'second rate' citizen, i.e. you will be held at arms length from the 'real' English, not be able to get the same benefits that 'real' English people do, despite the only thing setting you apart from the rest is that you were born outside of English borders... Does that seem logical or fair?

Nobody has said anything about anyone being 'none english' being treated like a second class citizen.

No it doesn't seem fair in a way, if that is the case- (treated poorly) But to me, noone can live in another country for x amount of years, then turn round and decide, 'actually I'm English' I don't understand it. When referring to the family i was talking about who had moved to oz, i believe i used the word 'traitor' at one point. Bit extreme yes, but it riles me that much

[Iwan is a Welshman]

Thats my point, it shouldn't be down to choice. It'd make viewing immigration statistics, and immigrants' status' much easier to distinguish. Though someone may have no connections where they were born is, to me, irrelevant. If I was born in another country, I would be proud of it. It doesn't mean to say that someone cannot live in another country.

I'm afraid it wouldn't make either immigration statistics or immigrant's status' easier to establish. With legal migrants there is almost no difficulty obtaining statistics and designating status. With illegal immigrants there's a massive problem statistically (although not status wise as determination of status isn't a problem at all.) But they're illegal. The difficulty is finding them to obtain the statistics (amongst other things.) The difficulty isnt their nationality.

I'm afraid you are getting nationality and cultural identity confused. Nationality is a fact ascertained for immigration purposes based on the nationality laws of that country. In this country that is determined by s.1 British Nationality Act 1981 which states that a person will be a British Citizen if, at the time of their birth, their mother or father is British or settled in the United Kingdom. Note that does not mean you need to be born in this country (so, for instance, the child of British servicemen born, say, in Germany is still British) nor can you qualify simply by being born in this country (the child of non-settled immigrant born in Britain is not automatically British.)

Cultural identity is something that people can't dictate. I wouldn't even say it's a choice. The way you've been brought up and the customs you're naturalised to will automatically make you feel a greater allegiance to one state or another. I doubt, but I can't comprehensively state, that Manuel Almunia or Mikel Arteta considered themselves English. That being said I can't remember either of those two announcing they wanted to play for England.

The requirements for naturalisation is three years residence if married to a British Citizen five if not. The applicant must also be 'of good character' and be able to demonstrate a proficiency in English language and a knowledge of British society. A pledge must be made to the UK and the applicant must intend to live in the UK.British Nationality Act 1981 s.6 sch.1. I'm assuming Almunia and Arteta were qualified to play for England under these provisions together with not being capped by another country.

[shen]

Nobody has said anything about anyone being 'none english' being treated like a second class citizen.

No it doesn't seem fair in a way, if that is the case- (treated poorly) But to me, noone can live in another country for x amount of years, then turn round and decide, 'actually I'm English' I don't understand it. When referring to the family i was talking about who had moved to oz, i believe i used the word 'traitor' at one point. Bit extreme yes, but it riles me that much

In most countries in Europe, you'll not have the same benefits if your citizenship is different from the country you reside in. The EU is a great thing in that respect, trying to make movement and assimilation of Europeans easier among member countries.

I don't see what's so difficult to understand about wanting to change nationality. From what I can read from your comments, the scenario you're imagining is an adult who grew up in a foreign country, moved to England and wanting to change nationality after x years. To my knowledge that scenario is very rare. Much more common is children of these adults, possibly born in the country of origin, growing up in England and have no connections to said country other than their heritage and it being their country of birth. Or even the opposite: Parents of a foreign country moving to England, having a child there who grows up with the family's foreign customs and ends up moving back to the country of origin despite not being born there or having lived there previously.

Either way, I really don't see why it grates you so much when people change nationality from English when they don't want to be part of that community, or conversely change nationality to English if they do want to.

Looking back this post probably wasn't phrased very well, but I think you'll understand what I mean...

[Alf Bentley]

Surely there is place of birth (or geographical nationality), legal nationality (passport(s) you're entitled to) - and national identity, based on cultural identity and upbringing, what we're really talking about.

Are you saying, lcfcstu, that if you'd been born in Ulan Bator airport as your Mum was on the way home from Australia that you'd feel 100% Mongolian though you had no connection to the place apart from the accident of birth? Is Cliff Richard Indian? Was Joe Strummer a Turk?

I am of English birth. I am of British (or UK) legal nationality (British passport, not English) but would be entitled to Irish legal nationality if I wanted....and my national identity is British and Irish.

I agree that people should stop English national identity from being hijacked by right-wingers. In a small way, that is what I was doing commenting on here - and joining my Anglo-Indian mate to attend the counter-demo to the EDL after the Forest away game last season. What with work, family, football and heavy drinking, I simply don't have the time to do much else. In the meantime, I feel more at ease describing myself as British, as it seems a more tolerant, inclusive national identity than "English" with its connotations of bigoted right-wing loudmouths scorning anyone who is different.

I do feel a strong connection to things English, though: countryside, football, beer, diverse music scene, humour, tolerance (the majority), trade unions, punk rock, great literature, TV/films...

I agree with the "3 generations" idea as an approximate yardstick: my Dad is an Irishman who has come to love various things English, I'm a British/Irish mongrel and happy with that, my daughter will probably grow up feeling more English/British - and for any grandkids, their Irish roots will probably be just a curiosity.

Anyway, don't scientists now reckon that apes first descended from the trees and started walking as humans in the Congo? So if you go back far enough, we're all of Congolese immigrant stock - apart from those pure-breds still living in the Congo!

Surely though thats even more reason to take that 'tag' away from the far right and claim it back as just being proud to be English??

If everyone was worried about being classed as racist when they say 'I'm English' then those who are patriotic will have no identity. I will never ever say I'm British. It doesn't sound right, and to me, its factually incorrect. IMO you are where you were born.

I know of a family that moved to Adelaide who now regard themselves as Australian. To me, thats bollocks. They were born in Leicester! If someone who was born in Pakistan for arguments sake (as being from Leicester its fair to say its relevant) and at the age of 3 months old move over to Englad, to me they're still Pakistani. PLEASE DO NOT SAY THATS RACIST FOR GODS SAKE! The only greyer area IMO is- take my old boss for example- He was born in Germany as his father was serving over there with the British Army. But to me, he is still German!

[Leicester_Loyal]

English.

[shen]

Surely there is place of birth (or geographical nationality), legal nationality (passport(s) you're entitled to) - and national identity, based on cultural identity and upbringing, what we're really talking about.

You're spot on. And these should matter, whereas place of birth should be irrelevant at best.

[Iwan is a Welshman]

You're spot on. And these should matter, whereas place of birth should be irrelevant at best.

Well put.

[Head Honcho]

English and British

Exactly.

Where do you draw the line on identity....... I'm not English I'm Braunstonian or to be exact Texan!

I'm Scottish but also proud to be British.

[Trav Le Bleu]

When it comes to nationalism I'm with Dr Johnson.