When people talk about "Americans" but what they really mean is "White people".
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 30, 2013, 12:16:31 PM
When people talk about "Americans" but what they really mean is "White people".
Kind of like when people say "Christian" but mean "people who aren't assholes"?
Quote from: Kai on October 30, 2013, 12:19:33 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 30, 2013, 12:16:31 PM
When people talk about "Americans" but what they really mean is "White people".
Kind of like when people say "Christian" but mean "people who aren't assholes"?
Sort of, but more the other way around.
It's just the general assumption that "American" means "white person". Just another tiny little unconscious exclusion of everyone who isn't white from being full participants in American society; a reminder, if you will, that we aren't Real Americans™.
It grinds on you, after a while.
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 30, 2013, 12:16:31 PM
When people talk about "Americans" but what they really mean is "White people".
Or even "some white people". I would hope that what most people think of when they say "americans" is, in fact, a very small minority of the population.
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
I've put some thought into this:
We are United States of Americans. There are Canadians to the North, and Mexicans to the South. I know we all live in North America, but think of something else to call us that doesn't sound dumb. Seriously.
Staters? Stateys? United Statsians? USers?
See?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
Bingo.
Quote from: Hoopla on October 30, 2013, 12:33:40 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 30, 2013, 12:16:31 PM
When people talk about "Americans" but what they really mean is "White people".
Or even "some white people". I would hope that what most people think of when they say "americans" is, in fact, a very small minority of the population.
I would hope for the exact opposite, but likely what you say reflects reality.
Quote from: Suu on October 30, 2013, 12:50:46 PM
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
I've put some thought into this:
We are United States of Americans. There are Canadians to the North, and Mexicans to the South. I know we all live in North America, but think of something else to call us that doesn't sound dumb. Seriously.
Staters? Stateys? United Statsians? USers?
See?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Yeah choose a better name for the United States of X, The current one is taken and comes off as confusing.
Quote from: Suu on October 30, 2013, 12:50:46 PM
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
I've put some thought into this:
We are United States of Americans. There are Canadians to the North, and Mexicans to the South. I know we all live in North America, but think of something else to call us that doesn't sound dumb. Seriously.
Staters? Stateys? United Statsians? USers?
See?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
We're the only country with "America" in the name, so it makes sense to shorthand us as "Americans". It just gets a little confusing when you consider that everyone else on both American continents are also Americans.
Purpleris and I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday. We're going to a Halloween party and she mentioned it was a Christian holiday. I pointed out that it wasn't Christian and many Christians actually are against it. It's a Western European/American holiday... but from the perspective of Turks, "Western" and "Christian" and "American" seem synonymous, particularly when it comes to cultural things like Halloween. The same from my perspective when I was there. One of their bayram (holidays) is the Candy Bayram which I assumed was Muslim, but its cultural. The same for New Years, where Turks celebrate with Turkey Dinners, a dude that looks like Santa, holiday lights, holiday trees, etc. Yet, its not Mulsim at all, its just Turkish... and some muslims hate it, because they see it as appropriation of Christian symbols.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 30, 2013, 01:09:43 PM
Purpleris and I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday. We're going to a Halloween party and she mentioned it was a Christian holiday. I pointed out that it wasn't Christian and many Christians actually are against it. It's a Western European/American holiday... but from the perspective of Turks, "Western" and "Christian" and "American" seem synonymous, particularly when it comes to cultural things like Halloween. The same from my perspective when I was there. One of their bayram (holidays) is the Candy Bayram which I assumed was Muslim, but its cultural. The same for New Years, where Turks celebrate with Turkey Dinners, a dude that looks like Santa, holiday lights, holiday trees, etc. Yet, its not Mulsim at all, its just Turkish... and some muslims hate it, because they see it as appropriation of Christian symbols.
That's hilarious, given that many American Christians think Halloween is Satanic, and the Christmas tree and Santa business is Pagan. :lol:
I wish I had something to add, but everyone ITT is right about everything.
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 30, 2013, 01:12:33 PM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 30, 2013, 01:09:43 PM
Purpleris and I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday. We're going to a Halloween party and she mentioned it was a Christian holiday. I pointed out that it wasn't Christian and many Christians actually are against it. It's a Western European/American holiday... but from the perspective of Turks, "Western" and "Christian" and "American" seem synonymous, particularly when it comes to cultural things like Halloween. The same from my perspective when I was there. One of their bayram (holidays) is the Candy Bayram which I assumed was Muslim, but its cultural. The same for New Years, where Turks celebrate with Turkey Dinners, a dude that looks like Santa, holiday lights, holiday trees, etc. Yet, its not Mulsim at all, its just Turkish... and some muslims hate it, because they see it as appropriation of Christian symbols.
That's hilarious, given that many American Christians think Halloween is Satanic, and the Christmas tree and Santa business is Pagan. :lol:
Yep, its a great example of very confused cultural interactions.
So, one could have a ceremony that was in every identical to another culture's, and have the same intent behind the ceremony, and it's not cultural appropriation if the simply call it something else?
"No, it's not a sweat lodge, it's a Swermaflerma."
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 30, 2013, 01:27:56 PM
So, one could have a ceremony that was in every identical to another culture's, and have the same intent behind the ceremony, and it's not cultural appropriation if the simply call it something else?
"No, it's not a sweat lodge, it's a Swermaflerma."
Sure, why not? Though, I'd argue that it wouldn't be 'in every way identical' since its unlikely that the individual has received the proper training or (likely) even experienced the actual ritual in its proper context.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 30, 2013, 01:23:11 PM
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 30, 2013, 01:12:33 PM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 30, 2013, 01:09:43 PM
Purpleris and I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday. We're going to a Halloween party and she mentioned it was a Christian holiday. I pointed out that it wasn't Christian and many Christians actually are against it. It's a Western European/American holiday... but from the perspective of Turks, "Western" a nd "Christian" and "American" seem synonymous, particularly when it comes to cultural things like Halloween. The same from my perspective when I was there. One of their bayram (holidays) is the Candy Bayram which I assumed was Muslim, but its cultural. The same for New Years, where Turks celebrate with Turkey Dinners, a dude that looks like Santa, holiday lights, holiday trees, etc. Yet, its not Mulsim at all, its just Turkish... and some muslims hate it, because they see it as appropriation of Christian symbols.
That's hilarious, given that many American Christians think Halloween is Satanic, and the Christmas tree and Santa business is Pagan. :lol:
Yep, its a great example of very confused cultural interactions.
This happened a lot during the Roman Empire, and a lot of it was pretty funny. It happens really anywhere in a world where a variety of cultures come together.
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:54:20 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 30, 2013, 12:50:46 PM
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
I've put some thought into this:
We are United States of Americans. There are Canadians to the North, and Mexicans to the South. I know we all live in North America, but think of something else to call us that doesn't sound dumb. Seriously.
Staters? Stateys? United Statsians? USers?
See?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Yeah choose a better name for the United States of X, The current one is taken and comes off as confusing.
FAT CITY
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
johnnie: not the Right-Kind-Of-Americantm because of latitude.
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 02:37:32 PM
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
Why not? At that point British would become more synonymous with English, since it would just be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish at that point, and the Northern Irish may someday no longer be you problem either, just leaving the English and the Welsh.
What I see weird about the problem in Europe is the opposite of the problem posed by Nigel: what do you call a person born and raised in the Republic of Ireland to two parents from Somalia? S/he's Irish, but also not Irish, because Irish people are Irish and not Somalian. Substitute Swedish for Irish. Or Russian. Or Japanese for that matter. You guys spread Britishness. Empire through expansion. The US and Canada are the first nations in the modern era where people from across the globe travel to live and settle there permanently. Empire through absorption. One strengthens ethnic and cultural identity, the other assimilates and diffuses them.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:08:48 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 02:37:32 PM
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
Why not? At that point British would become more synonymous with English, since it would just be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish at that point, and the Northern Irish may someday no longer be you problem either, just leaving the English and the Welsh.
What I see weird about the problem in Europe is the opposite of the problem posed by Nigel: what do you call a person born and raised in the Republic of Ireland to two parents from Somalia? S/he's Irish, but also not Irish, because Irish people are Irish and not Somalian. Substitute Swedish for Irish. Or Russian. Or Japanese for that matter. You guys spread Britishness. Empire through expansion. The US and Canada are the first nations in the modern era where people from across the globe travel to live and settle there permanently. Empire through absorption. One strengthens ethnic and cultural identity, the other assimilates and diffuses them.
Its like Quantum Mechanics... there is weirdness, but only because we made up the lines, categories and definitions.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:08:48 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 02:37:32 PM
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
Why not? At that point British would become more synonymous with English, since it would just be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish at that point, and the Northern Irish may someday no longer be you problem either, just leaving the English and the Welsh.
Because the history of Britain is the history of merging England and Scotland,
not England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland.
The full name of the country is The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ireland is not, and has never been, part of Britain.
Wales was considered part of England long before England and Scotland merged, and was seen largely as a distastefully foreign, backwards province during that period - but not particularly worthy of its own national identity. Scotland, by contrast, was the reason for the formation of Britain. It was a deliberate attempt to try and get people in Scotland to stop seeing the English as oppressors, and people in England to stop seeing the Scottish as rabid barbarians.
England's national identity was fairly successfully eroded into a British one, where the English consider Scotland and Wales to essentially be part of one big country. There's recently been a kick back as Wales and Scotland have rediscovered (or just gotten more vocal) about their own identities, but by and large, English national identity has been usurped by the British label. Except when specifically talking about geographical issues. The difficulty here is, even within England, there are huge differing cultures. The North, The South, The Midlands and London all have different cultures, and there's not much which binds these areas together in the way of traditions, in a way which isn't true of Scotland and Wales where the broad feeling that they are all cut of the same cloth roughly exists.
Scotland has been a huge part of the success of the British Empire, too. A disproportionate amount of our great inventors and thinkers have been Scottish, and during the early days of empire, entering the military and going off to colonize foreign lands was one of the only ways for a Scottish gentleman to obtain respectability within London. Which is why a huge amount of our colonial past is really the story of ambitious Scottish men going off and colonizing the world on behalf of the English. There were much easier and far less dangerous ways for English gentlemen to gain a reputation, and so most of them stayed home and took part in other routes to respectability. It'd be more proper, arguably, to call the British Empire the Scottish Empire, because the English, whilst the larger population numerically, did far less to shape the growth of the Empire and its culture.
This all boils down to the fact that the English
bought Scotland. They didn't conquer it, but nor did the Scottish people want to become a part of Britain. It all just sort of happened because of debt and the position of the Lairds compared to the powers in Westminster. Whilst England has come to identify itself - in broad terms - with the success of the British Empire and most English people consider themselves to come from that proud tradition... Scotland has always maintained a separate history and narrative of itself. One which, honestly, has a far greater grounding in reality than most English people would be comfortable to admit.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 30, 2013, 03:11:41 PM
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:08:48 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 02:37:32 PM
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
Why not? At that point British would become more synonymous with English, since it would just be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish at that point, and the Northern Irish may someday no longer be you problem either, just leaving the English and the Welsh.
What I see weird about the problem in Europe is the opposite of the problem posed by Nigel: what do you call a person born and raised in the Republic of Ireland to two parents from Somalia? S/he's Irish, but also not Irish, because Irish people are Irish and not Somalian. Substitute Swedish for Irish. Or Russian. Or Japanese for that matter. You guys spread Britishness. Empire through expansion. The US and Canada are the first nations in the modern era where people from across the globe travel to live and settle there permanently. Empire through absorption. One strengthens ethnic and cultural identity, the other assimilates and diffuses them.
Its like Quantum Mechanics... there is weirdness, but only because we made up the lines, categories and definitions.
Yeah. We've made is so that sometimes something is not that something, and sometimes can be two mutually exclusive or even antagonistic somethings simultaneously. I mean people are simultaneously multiple somethings anyway, since we're not one dimensional personalities. But we tend to be far more rigid in defining nationality, when it means nothing more than what government(s) counts you as a citizen.
Its also worth noting that up until the printing press or thereabouts, most people did not particularly consider themselves to be part of a country at all. They were concerned about their local communities, but the means to build a national identity as such didn't really exist for the common folk.
The formation of countries as identities is one of the areas I found really fascinating at university. I personally think that the internet and easy travel are really starting to erode it as a prime factor in identity now, too. In ways that just weren't possible before, our geographical location is becoming less and less important to who we are and how we think of ourselves.
At least, to those places where these luxuries apply of course. There's still vast parts of the world where these conditions aren't relevant.
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:08:48 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 02:37:32 PM
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
Why not? At that point British would become more synonymous with English, since it would just be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish at that point, and the Northern Irish may someday no longer be you problem either, just leaving the English and the Welsh.
Because the history of Britain is the history of merging England and Scotland, not England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland.
The full name of the country is The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ireland is not, and has never been, part of Britain.
Wales was considered part of England long before England and Scotland merged, and was seen largely as a distastefully foreign, backwards province during that period - but not particularly worthy of its own national identity. Scotland, by contrast, was the reason for the formation of Britain. It was a deliberate attempt to try and get people in Scotland to stop seeing the English as oppressors, and people in England to stop seeing the Scottish as rabid barbarians.
England's national identity was fairly successfully eroded into a British one, where the English consider Scotland and Wales to essentially be part of one big country. There's recently been a kick back as Wales and Scotland have rediscovered (or just gotten more vocal) about their own identities, but by and large, English national identity has been usurped by the British label. Except when specifically talking about geographical issues. The difficulty here is, even within England, there are huge differing cultures. The North, The South, The Midlands and London all have different cultures, and there's not much which binds these areas together in the way of traditions, in a way which isn't true of Scotland and Wales where the broad feeling that they are all cut of the same cloth roughly exists.
Scotland has been a huge part of the success of the British Empire, too. A disproportionate amount of our great inventors and thinkers have been Scottish, and during the early days of empire, entering the military and going off to colonize foreign lands was one of the only ways for a Scottish gentleman to obtain respectability within London. Which is why a huge amount of our colonial past is really the story of ambitious Scottish men going off and colonizing the world on behalf of the English. There were much easier and far less dangerous ways for English gentlemen to gain a reputation, and so most of them stayed home and took part in other routes to respectability. It'd be more proper, arguably, to call the British Empire the Scottish Empire, because the English, whilst the larger population numerically, did far less to shape the growth of the Empire and its culture.
This all boils down to the fact that the English bought Scotland. They didn't conquer it, but nor did the Scottish people want to become a part of Britain. It all just sort of happened because of debt and the position of the Lairds compared to the powers in Westminster. Whilst England has come to identify itself - in broad terms - with the success of the British Empire and most English people consider themselves to come from that proud tradition... Scotland has always maintained a separate history and narrative of itself. One which, honestly, has a far greater grounding in reality than most English people would be comfortable to admit.
Should the Northern Irish, when describing their citizenship, then, describe themselves as United Kingdomonian rather than British? Should the Welsh just call themselves English because they're traditionally considered to be part of England by England? A British subject is a British subject, just as an American is an American and a Canadian is not unless they move south.
It seems to me that the English then have made the term British synonymous with English themselves. I could be mistaken but I don't see a lot of Scottish culture and identity permeating into British culture as a whole and then diffusing into England and making the English more Scottish. Ultimately England is drawing the lines and making the definitions as to what Britain and British means and everyone else seems to be pretty ambivalent about it.
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 03:31:46 PM
Its also worth noting that up until the printing press or thereabouts, most people did not particularly consider themselves to be part of a country at all. They were concerned about their local communities, but the means to build a national identity as such didn't really exist for the common folk.
The formation of countries as identities is one of the areas I found really fascinating at university. I personally think that the internet and easy travel are really starting to erode it as a prime factor in identity now, too. In ways that just weren't possible before, our geographical location is becoming less and less important to who we are and how we think of ourselves.
At least, to those places where these luxuries apply of course. There's still vast parts of the world where these conditions aren't relevant.
Oh, I agree with this totally. It creates a global culture. Britishisms are starting to enter American vernacular, or at least we're able to understand your jibberjabber if we don't adopt parts of it. The internet is becoming its own melting pot.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:36:23 PM
Should the Northern Irish, when describing their citizenship, then, describe themselves as United Kingdomonian rather than British? Should the Welsh just call themselves English because they're traditionally considered to be part of England by England? A British subject is a British subject, just as an American is an American and a Canadian is not unless they move south.
I don't know what people
should do. I know that this is a massive area of confusion. I also know that you are just as right calling yourself a Citizen of the United Kingdom as a British Citizen. I suspect, for people from Northern Ireland, that would be more technically correct. I also know that people from Northern Ireland have a far stronger identity with far different elements to it depending on whether they consider themselves Loyalist or Separatist, and that both of those groups have traditions we in England consider completely weird and would never do. Look at the recent troubles in Northern Ireland regarding when and how flags should be shown, and the reaction of the UK government for an excellent example.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:36:23 PM
It seems to me that the English then have made the term British synonymous with English themselves. I could be mistaken but I don't see a lot of Scottish culture and identity permeating into British culture as a whole and then diffusing into England and making the English more Scottish. Ultimately England is drawing the lines and making the definitions as to what Britain and British means and everyone else seems to be pretty ambivalent about it.
Firstly, I'd say you are absolutely right that few Scottish and Welsh traditions have permeated into English culture. Here's the thing though: traditions in the North, South, Midlands, London... these traditions rarely permeate outside of those regions
either. What the hell British culture is, is a massively difficult question to answer, and one which is the subject of intense debate over here almost constantly. As is 'what is Englishness', because there's practically nothing that people can agree on regarding it.
And this is why, if/when Scotland, Wales and Ireland leave England behind, there's going to be a massive amount of confusion about who is what and why. Is a Scottish person who lives in England really Scottish or really English? And the other way around? Times by four. The very fact that Englishness has become Britishness is the issue, because what I've been trying to say here is that the terms English and British do mean very different things.
The British Broadcasting Company has different guidelines for different regions within England, as well as in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. It shows different programs, and has played a key role in revitalizing the native languages of Scotland and Wales (not sure on Irish, I think that has only caught on in Southern Ireland but I'm hardly an expert). We aren't one country, we're a mishmash of all sorts of different things - and when we split up, a lot of people are going to be left pretty danged confused about what they are 'supposed' to stand for these days.
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 03:49:06 PM
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:36:23 PM
Should the Northern Irish, when describing their citizenship, then, describe themselves as United Kingdomonian rather than British? Should the Welsh just call themselves English because they're traditionally considered to be part of England by England? A British subject is a British subject, just as an American is an American and a Canadian is not unless they move south.
I don't know what people should do. I know that this is a massive area of confusion. I also know that you are just as right calling yourself a Citizen of the United Kingdom as a British Citizen. I suspect, for people from Northern Ireland, that would be more technically correct. I also know that people from Northern Ireland have a far stronger identity with far different elements to it depending on whether they consider themselves Loyalist or Separatist, and that both of those groups have traditions we in England consider completely weird and would never do. Look at the recent troubles in Northern Ireland regarding when and how flags should be shown, and the reaction of the UK government for an excellent example.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:36:23 PM
It seems to me that the English then have made the term British synonymous with English themselves. I could be mistaken but I don't see a lot of Scottish culture and identity permeating into British culture as a whole and then diffusing into England and making the English more Scottish. Ultimately England is drawing the lines and making the definitions as to what Britain and British means and everyone else seems to be pretty ambivalent about it.
Firstly, I'd say you are absolutely right that few Scottish and Welsh traditions have permeated into English culture. Here's the thing though: traditions in the North, South, Midlands, London... these traditions rarely permeate outside of those regions either. What the hell British culture is, is a massively difficult question to answer, and one which is the subject of intense debate over here almost constantly. As is 'what is Englishness', because there's practically nothing that people can agree on regarding it.
And this is why, if/when Scotland, Wales and Ireland leave England behind, there's going to be a massive amount of confusion about who is what and why. Is a Scottish person who lives in England really Scottish or really English? And the other way around? Times by four. The very fact that Englishness has become Britishness is the issue, because what I've been trying to say here is that the terms English and British do mean very different things.
The British Broadcasting Company has different guidelines for different regions within England, as well as in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. It shows different programs, and has played a key role in revitalizing the native languages of Scotland and Wales (not sure on Irish, I think that has only caught on in Southern Ireland but I'm hardly an expert). We aren't one country, we're a mishmash of all sorts of different things - and when we split up, a lot of people are going to be left pretty danged confused about what they are 'supposed' to stand for these days.
Ok, I can see that.
As far as Irish is concerned, the BBC has less of a role in that in the Republic, since the Republic's own policy is to attempt to revive the language, which is why all street and highway signs are in both Irish and English. As far as broadcasting Raidio na Gaeltachta and TG4 fill that role. In the North, it probably is BBC generated interest.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: Doktor Blight on October 30, 2013, 03:08:48 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 02:37:32 PM
I know most British people consider Halloween to be an 'American' holiday, because until fairly recently (last few decades), it just wasn't something we celebrated at all. Hearing it described as a European holiday is interesting. It might be technically correct, but I think most people here would find that baffling.
National labels in the United Kingdom are also a huge mess. People say British when they mean English, English when they mean British, European when they mean to exclude the Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, and any-or-all of the above except European when what they mean is the white segment of those various populations, excluding the large migrant communities we've got.
Ask three people what Britishness is and you'll probably get four different answers. Our national identity really is a mess right now. If the Scottish leave, I don't see it getting any clearer.
Why not? At that point British would become more synonymous with English, since it would just be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish at that point, and the Northern Irish may someday no longer be you problem either, just leaving the English and the Welsh.
Because the history of Britain is the history of merging England and Scotland, not England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland.
The full name of the country is The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ireland is not, and has never been, part of Britain.
Wales was considered part of England long before England and Scotland merged, and was seen largely as a distastefully foreign, backwards province during that period - but not particularly worthy of its own national identity. Scotland, by contrast, was the reason for the formation of Britain. It was a deliberate attempt to try and get people in Scotland to stop seeing the English as oppressors, and people in England to stop seeing the Scottish as rabid barbarians.
England's national identity was fairly successfully eroded into a British one, where the English consider Scotland and Wales to essentially be part of one big country. There's recently been a kick back as Wales and Scotland have rediscovered (or just gotten more vocal) about their own identities, but by and large, English national identity has been usurped by the British label. Except when specifically talking about geographical issues. The difficulty here is, even within England, there are huge differing cultures. The North, The South, The Midlands and London all have different cultures, and there's not much which binds these areas together in the way of traditions, in a way which isn't true of Scotland and Wales where the broad feeling that they are all cut of the same cloth roughly exists.
Scotland has been a huge part of the success of the British Empire, too. A disproportionate amount of our great inventors and thinkers have been Scottish, and during the early days of empire, entering the military and going off to colonize foreign lands was one of the only ways for a Scottish gentleman to obtain respectability within London. Which is why a huge amount of our colonial past is really the story of ambitious Scottish men going off and colonizing the world on behalf of the English. There were much easier and far less dangerous ways for English gentlemen to gain a reputation, and so most of them stayed home and took part in other routes to respectability. It'd be more proper, arguably, to call the British Empire the Scottish Empire, because the English, whilst the larger population numerically, did far less to shape the growth of the Empire and its culture.
This all boils down to the fact that the English bought Scotland. They didn't conquer it, but nor did the Scottish people want to become a part of Britain. It all just sort of happened because of debt and the position of the Lairds compared to the powers in Westminster. Whilst England has come to identify itself - in broad terms - with the success of the British Empire and most English people consider themselves to come from that proud tradition... Scotland has always maintained a separate history and narrative of itself. One which, honestly, has a far greater grounding in reality than most English people would be comfortable to admit.
Should the Northern Irish, when describing their citizenship, then, describe themselves as United Kingdomonian rather than British? Should the Welsh just call themselves English because they're traditionally considered to be part of England by England? A British subject is a British subject, just as an American is an American and a Canadian is not unless they move south.
It seems to me that the English then have made the term British synonymous with English themselves. I could be mistaken but I don't see a lot of Scottish culture and identity permeating into British culture as a whole and then diffusing into England and making the English more Scottish. Ultimately England is drawing the lines and making the definitions as to what Britain and British means and everyone else seems to be pretty ambivalent about it.
Well, there is Irn Bru at the local Co-Op. :wink:
The Irish channels are the ones that get the HBO shows and breaking bad so everyone watches those.
It's a very sneaky but effective system.
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 04:02:19 PM
The Irish channels are the ones that get the HBO shows and breaking bad so everyone watches those.
It's a very sneaky but effective system.
I think I noticed that I was watching it a bit more than usual last time I was over.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 30, 2013, 01:27:56 PM
So, one could have a ceremony that was in every identical to another culture's, and have the same intent behind the ceremony, and it's not cultural appropriation if the simply call it something else?
"No, it's not a sweat lodge, it's a Swermaflerma."
Not sure where you're getting that from.
Odd. I don't think this is the thread that was meant for.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 30, 2013, 05:47:33 PM
Odd. I don't think this is the thread that was meant for.
Yeah, I realized after I posted that it was probably intended for Alty's authenticity thread.
Most likely. It's also a dumb question, based on semantics. So consider it withdrawn.
Quote from: Suu on October 30, 2013, 12:50:46 PM
Quote from: Faust on October 30, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
Just using Americans for the US instead of the continent is enough to bother most people people I know. Couple that with your peeve and White citizens of the USA are suddenly representatives of a huge population and landmass that they are a small part of.
I've put some thought into this:
We are United States of Americans. There are Canadians to the North, and Mexicans to the South. I know we all live in North America, but think of something else to call us that doesn't sound dumb. Seriously.
Staters? Stateys? United Statsians? USers?
See?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
I THINK THAT WAS THE FUCKING POINT OF NIGEL'S POST.
GODDAMMIT.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on October 30, 2013, 01:09:43 PM
Purpleris and I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday. We're going to a Halloween party and she mentioned it was a Christian holiday. I pointed out that it wasn't Christian and many Christians actually are against it. It's a Western European/American holiday... but from the perspective of Turks, "Western" and "Christian" and "American" seem synonymous, particularly when it comes to cultural things like Halloween. The same from my perspective when I was there. One of their bayram (holidays) is the Candy Bayram which I assumed was Muslim, but its cultural. The same for New Years, where Turks celebrate with Turkey Dinners, a dude that looks like Santa, holiday lights, holiday trees, etc. Yet, its not Mulsim at all, its just Turkish... and some muslims hate it, because they see it as appropriation of Christian symbols.
THREAD IS NOW ABOUT TURKEY.
TURKEY TURKEY TURKEY
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 03:31:46 PM
Its also worth noting that up until the printing press or thereabouts, most people did not particularly consider themselves to be part of a country at all. They were concerned about their local communities, but the means to build a national identity as such didn't really exist for the common folk.
The formation of countries as identities is one of the areas I found really fascinating at university. I personally think that the internet and easy travel are really starting to erode it as a prime factor in identity now, too. In ways trhat just weren't possible before, our geographical location is becoming less and less important to who we are and how we think of ourselves.
At least, to those places where these luxuries apply of course. There's still vast parts of the world where these conditions aren't relevant.
This is good news got me, since I've never felt much cultural identity... When you're raised by a television in south western Ontario, surrounded by largely American TV stations, it's hard to feel "Canadian". Maybe if I'd been into sports it would have been different.
Quote from: Hoopla on October 31, 2013, 12:36:35 AM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 30, 2013, 03:31:46 PM
Its also worth noting that up until the printing press or thereabouts, most people did not particularly consider themselves to be part of a country at all. They were concerned about their local communities, but the means to build a national identity as such didn't really exist for the common folk.
The formation of countries as identities is one of the areas I found really fascinating at university. I personally think that the internet and easy travel are really starting to erode it as a prime factor in identity now, too. In ways trhat just weren't possible before, our geographical location is becoming less and less important to who we are and how we think of ourselves.
At least, to those places where these luxuries apply of course. There's still vast parts of the world where these conditions aren't relevant.
This is good news got me, since I've never felt much cultural identity... When you're raised by a television in south western Ontario, surrounded by largely American TV stations, it's hard to feel "Canadian". Maybe if I'd been into sports it would have been different.
It's hard for me to feel "American."
Aside from the fact that I have strong identification from my father's homeland and my mother shares his ethnicity, American can mean practically anything. As far as America goes, I identify as Bostonian and New Englander. The United States only comes into play when I leave or reenter the United States. I have some things in common with someone from South Dakota, and more not in common. Seems to me the only thing that Americans have in common with other Americans is citizenship, and, as Nigel pointed out, somewhat of an assumption that an American is white. It's making me think of all of those qualifiers. I'm a (ethnic) American. Ask a white mutt what they are, and they'll say American. Me? I'm an Irish American, since my ancestry is overwhelmingly Irish. Nigel is an American. Multiracial. White people are mutts. She's multiracial on grounds of Scottish, Native, and Black, but never a mutt. Mutt is a joke that white people say to each other to basically say "indistinct American of recent European descent." Hell, we don't even let actual Americans call themselves Americans. They have to be Native Americans, and they were here first.
I'm a dead man in Tucson. Nationality is meaningless to me.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 31, 2013, 12:54:20 AM
I'm a dead man in Tucson. Nationality is meaningless to me.
Tucson is the great equalizer.