|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 8:17:49 GMT
You can consider yourself whatever you like. As can you. You're the one who is claiming I'm not English, the emphasis is on you to make your case, thus far you have been unconvincing. I notice as well you haven't challenged Sandy's claim that his son is English despite him being no more ethnically English than I am. Is there a political reliability clause in your ethnic definition of Englishness? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 19, 2024 8:23:47 GMT
I repeat it is a process of accepting and acceptance. My son thinks he is English, does not claim some other heritage and is accepted as being English. The broad consideration legally for considering ethnic differences. Lammy claims to be an ethnic minority, you claim an Irish heritage. Where does that leave people who have an English heritage. Both you and Lammy claim you are part of that whole yet both claim not to be part of that whole as it suits. Would you take recourse to law if someone said I do not want to employ any Irish to you, the point is as you claim Irish heritage you could and you would be successful as part of an ethnic minority group. That is the law and it depends on ethnic differences. But your son is of Scottish heritage, this is a fact is it not? As a parent I'm assuming you know how parentage works. Yes but he does not claim Scottish heritage, he is English full stop he accepts Englishness in full and is accepted as being English in full. Which is the process and realistically if a person has no English heritage at all can still be ethnically English by being assimilated into the whole. But that would exclude any right to claim an ethnic minority status at any point. I repeat I did not not exclude you you volunteered the information yourself that you were of Irish heritage and as such part of an immigrant community. Your claim not mine. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 8:30:17 GMT
But your son is of Scottish heritage, this is a fact is it not? As a parent I'm assuming you know how parentage works. Yes but he does not claim Scottish heritage, he is English full stop he accepts Englishness in full and is accepted as being English in full. Which is the process and realistically if a person has no English heritage at all can still be ethnically English by being assimilated into the whole. But that would exclude any right to claim an ethnic minority status at any point. I repeat I did not not exclude you you volunteered the information yourself that you were of Irish heritage and as such part of an immigrant community. Your claim not mine. What your son claims doesn't change the fact that he is of Scottish heritage. He is an Englishman of Scottish heritage just as I am an Englishman of Irish heritage. Your son not mentioning his Scottish heritage doesn't magically erase it. I don't claim to be part of an immigrant community, I acknowledge my immigrant descent. That doesn't mean I'm any less English than your son. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 19, 2024 8:34:02 GMT
You can consider yourself whatever you like. As can you. You're the one who is claiming I'm not English, the emphasis is on you to make your case, thus far you have been unconvincing. As far as I'm concerned you're as English as David Lammy who also claims that status for himself. Unfortunately though, both for him and for you, a civic English nationality does not exist yet (it may in the future) so the only form of Englishness available to lay claim to is an ethnically-based one. For which neither of you qualify. In the meantime, and until such time as an independent England comes to pass, you'll have to put up with being British along with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown and all the other recent entrants. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 8:36:45 GMT
As can you. You're the one who is claiming I'm not English, the emphasis is on you to make your case, thus far you have been unconvincing. As far as I'm concerned you're as English as David Lammy who also claims that status for himself. Unfortunately though, both for him and for you, a civic English nationality does not exist yet (it may in the future) so the only form of Englishness available to lay claim to is an ethnically-based one. For which neither of you qualify. In the meantime, and until such time as an independent England comes to pass, you'll have to put up with being British along with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown and all the other recent entrants. You overlook being culturally English as well as a common sense definition. Are you denying the existence of English culture? Seems rather sinister. And I repeat I notice you haven't challenged Sandy's claim that his son is English despite him being no more ethnically English than I am. Is there a political reliability clause in your ethnic definition of Englishness? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 19, 2024 8:42:44 GMT
Yes but he does not claim Scottish heritage, he is English full stop he accepts Englishness in full and is accepted as being English in full. Which is the process and realistically if a person has no English heritage at all can still be ethnically English by being assimilated into the whole. But that would exclude any right to claim an ethnic minority status at any point. I repeat I did not not exclude you you volunteered the information yourself that you were of Irish heritage and as such part of an immigrant community. Your claim not mine. What your son claims doesn't change the fact that he is of Scottish heritage. He is an Englishman of Scottish heritage just as I am an Englishman of Irish heritage. Your son not mentioning his Scottish heritage doesn't magically erase it. I don't claim to be part of an immigrant community, I acknowledge my immigrant descent. That doesn't mean I'm any less English than your son. My son is an Englishman of mixed Scottish and English (in the main part) heritage. But if I recall you did claim to be part of a first generation immigrant community in relation to some discussion on repatriation or similar. The details escape me. I can only keep repeating it is a process of accepting and acceptance. I did ask a question as regards discrimination and the law. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 19, 2024 8:45:02 GMT
Re: 'culturally English'
If you had even skimmed the definition of an ethnie I provided earlier you would have noted that a common culture is an essential feature of that definition. That's not to say that a culture may not be shared, gifted or appropriated. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 8:52:32 GMT
What your son claims doesn't change the fact that he is of Scottish heritage. He is an Englishman of Scottish heritage just as I am an Englishman of Irish heritage. Your son not mentioning his Scottish heritage doesn't magically erase it. I don't claim to be part of an immigrant community, I acknowledge my immigrant descent. That doesn't mean I'm any less English than your son. My son is an Englishman of mixed Scottish and English (in the main part) heritage. But if I recall you did claim to be part of a first generation immigrant community in relation to some discussion on repatriation or similar. The details escape me. I can only keep repeating it is a process of accepting and acceptance. I did ask a question as regards discrimination and the law. I'm of mixed Irish and English heritage. I accept I am English and am accepted as English by the vast majority of my compatriots. You of course aren't one of my compatriots but seem determined to stick your nose in anyway and try to deny my English identity for seemingly no other reason than personal spite. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 8:53:35 GMT
Re: 'culturally English'
If you had even skimmed the definition of an ethnie I provided earlier you would have noted that a common culture is an essential feature of that definition. That's not to say that a culture may not be shared, gifted or appropriated. And what about the political reliability clause I mentioned? If I agreed with every word you said on here would that change my national identity? |
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Aug 19, 2024 9:01:49 GMT
I can't fault Dan Dare's logic and I don't see why anyone would have a problem with it. The last thing we should be doing is taking pointers from the followers of ABE.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 19, 2024 9:28:56 GMT
Re: 'culturally English'
If you had even skimmed the definition of an ethnie I provided earlier you would have noted that a common culture is an essential feature of that definition. That's not to say that a culture may not be shared, gifted or appropriated. And what about the political reliability clause I mentioned? If I agreed with every word you said on here would that change my national identity? I'm unfamiliar with the concept of a 'political reliability clause' outside of totalitarian states and dictatorships. Can you elaborate?
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 19, 2024 9:37:01 GMT
As far as I'm concerned you're as English as David Lammy who also claims that status for himself. Unfortunately though, both for him and for you, a civic English nationality does not exist yet (it may in the future) so the only form of Englishness available to lay claim to is an ethnically-based one. For which neither of you qualify. In the meantime, and until such time as an independent England comes to pass, you'll have to put up with being British along with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown and all the other recent entrants. You overlook being culturally English as well as a common sense definition. Are you denying the existence of English culture? Seems rather sinister. And I repeat I notice you haven't challenged Sandy's claim that his son is English despite him being no more ethnically English than I am. Is there a political reliability clause in your ethnic definition of Englishness? He can challenge it if he wishes and we would disagree. I do not know about more ethnically English as I did not refer to that but if we are now looking at heritage as a guide, and I have not said it should arise unbidden, then I am effectively three quarters English. However that still does not affect any of what I have said. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 9:54:46 GMT
And what about the political reliability clause I mentioned? If I agreed with every word you said on here would that change my national identity? I'm unfamiliar with the concept of a 'political reliability clause' outside of totalitarian states and dictatorships. Can you elaborate?
Sandypine has claimed that his son is English despite him being no more ethnically English than I am. Yet you haven't challenged him on this. I'm assuming you're giving him a pass because you and Sandy are in broad political agreement. I'm happy to stand corrected if you were to challenge him as robustly as you've challenged me. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 19, 2024 9:59:17 GMT
You overlook being culturally English as well as a common sense definition. Are you denying the existence of English culture? Seems rather sinister. And I repeat I notice you haven't challenged Sandy's claim that his son is English despite him being no more ethnically English than I am. Is there a political reliability clause in your ethnic definition of Englishness? He can challenge it if he wishes and we would disagree. I do not know about more ethnically English as I did not refer to that but if we are now looking at heritage as a guide, and I have not said it should arise unbidden, then I am effectively three quarters English. However that still does not affect any of what I have said. So despite being ethnically three quarters English you are Scottish but I can't be English despite being ethnically half English? Scooby Doo was less confused than you. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Aug 19, 2024 10:02:02 GMT
I don't agree with Sandy's argument about the feasibility of assimilation into an ethnie but do agree with his point that you can't be a member of two ethnies at the same time.
|
|
