Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[XXSockXX]

Well, theres the Native Americans, Aztecs, Maya, and Inca....

You are correct though in that the European part of that history in the Americas is insignificant compared to the millenia of accumulated history in Eruasia.

Though I would question how much you can include Native Americans into that. Most European patriotism is ethnicity-based, so you can actually claim (genetics kind of supports that though nationalists never really bothered with it anyway) to be a descendent of the people who "did" all the history, which most Americans can't. Many Americans seem to view it that way too, trying to establish or maintain some kind of European legacy in their family history.

Now see, I'm American, so obviously I'm indoctrinated and should be ignored, but ethnic nationalism has always struck me as a bad thing, not a good one. Of course, Europe has such a positive history with ethnic nationalism, I'm just crazy. But bear in mind a lot of America isn't European you know. There's a lot of sweeping generalizations you have.

Oh, I'm not advocating that kind of stuff, just explaining it. The ethnic component seems to be - to me at least - an important difference in your standard varieties of patriotism on the different sides of the pond. This makes mutual understanding a bit harder (hence the usual misconceptions of Europeans seeing Americans as extremely nationalistic and Americans thinking citzenship matters when nationality is concerned).
Personally I think every kind of patriotism or nationalism is ultimately questionable, due to lack of own involvment in whatever "heritage" one could claim to be proud of.
Still I don't think you can seriously argue that American history isn't mostly European-based, apart from the bit about the Iroqouis influence on the US constitution, there isn't much of relevance or cultural impact that lasted from pre-columbian America.

[TD1]

You speak as if trying to educate me, and that's alright (The extermination of ignorance is a noble thing), but it's not a question of ignorance. I know the facts.

Countries seldom do have one culture, true. But Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland are not one country, but two separate ones, more separate than you intend to be from Britain. If I were to call Scotland a mere extension of England, you would not like it, not one bit. Given that you are talking about one country, this point is invalid. We are talking of definition.

Why should I challenge that? The Irish do not want associations with Britain, vehemently so. There is no way to challenge that. And, as we are two separate countries, it is rather handy to simply redefine ourselves as not Irish. And you forget, the Ulster Scots did not go abroad; they simply went from one part of the country to another.

Of course it's possible to be as Northern Irish as I am now if I were defined as Irish. But the term would hold the same meaning, and that meaning would not be me-again, two separate countries. It is simpler to redefine myself. And again, the Republic of Ireland would not welcome a Protestant or Ulster Scot facet to their name. The mass exodus of Protestants from the Republic proves that. And why shouldn't I get hung up on borders? I'm sure the Ukrainians are rather hung up on their own border right now.

No, there's nothing stopping me from being an Irish Protestant, if I did have a religion. Except where I am, which is Northern Ireland. Religion is simply one more difference. A very much so fought over one. The Catholic majority Republic does not like Protestant Northern Ireland people. That is simple truth. And why should I be defined, yet again, as something that I'm not, and something which doesn't even like me?

And a United Ireland simply won't happen. Not in my generation, anyway. It is deeply ingrained. "No surrender" etc. To do less would be forfeit, which to many is unacceptable. Your arguments convinced me that I may be wrong on the matter of Scotland, and that separation may indeed be of benefit...especially when I think and look at my own situation. It would be Scotland and the U.K., only worse. You have same religion, no huge levels of animosity and few legal/political deviations with the rest of the U.K.   Northern Ireland and its separate culture would be sidelined. There is no getting around that.

And yet again, we come to borders. Republican and Northern Ireland are not the same country. It comes down to America and Canada again; Ireland is America, Northern Ireland Canada. Canada is not called America, because it isn't. Northern Irish people shouldn't be called Irish, because they're not.

There is a brutal divide between the two parts. Mend it if you will, and I wish you luck, but the differences and old hurts will still be there. Northern Ireland wants Union with Britain. Republic of Ireland doesn't. Northern Ireland has its own identity, its own culture, its own laws, its own education, its own music, its own parades, its own history and its ow ethnic background. The only reason why Northern Irish people should be called Irish is because of proximity to Ireland. Or unless they expressly want to be called Irish.

[smjjames]

Yeah, I know American history is mostly European-based, but that's written history.

Still, what I was saying about the Maya, Inca, and Aztec is that the history is there, just not as... clear. Its not like we have libraries full of volumes written in Mayan or Aztec.

[Owlbread]

Countries seldom do have one culture, true. But Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland are not one country, but two separate ones, more separate than you intend to be from Britain. If I were to call Scotland a mere extension of England, you would not like it, not one bit. Given that you are talking about one country, this point is invalid. We are talking of definition.

But you're just asserting that Northern Ireland and Ireland are two separate countries. I've always heard that Northern Ireland is not a "separate country", rather, it is just a province that is a part of the UK. That is the Loyalist stance, do you stray from that sir?

Why should I challenge that? The Irish do not want associations with Britain, vehemently so. There is no way to challenge that. And, as we are two separate countries, it is rather handy to simply redefine ourselves as not Irish.

But you still haven't really given me a convincing reason for not wanting associations with Ireland other than "because there is a border".

And you forget, the Ulster Scots did not go abroad; they simply went from one part of the country to another.

Aaaactually.. I thought we were on the same page about the plantations? Ireland was Not a part of the same country.

Of course it's possible to be as Northern Irish as I am now if I were defined as Irish. But the term would hold the same meaning, and that meaning would not be me-again, two separate countries.

But again, you seem to be straying from the Loyalist line into the old Ulster Nationalist lines. The line was always Northern Ireland is not a separate country from Ireland, it is a province within the United Kingdom, separate from Ireland because it is a part of Britain.

I have often thought that Northern Ireland should be an independent country. I respect the idea as long as it is inclusive and looks to a future where both the native Irish in Northern Ireland and the Ulster Scots can be respected equally, where Irish and Ulster Scots are on road signs etc.

It is simpler to redefine myself. And again, the Republic of Ireland would not welcome a Protestant or Ulster Scot facet to their name. The mass exodus of Protestants from the Republic proves that.

Those were the old days. Times have changed since then. Ireland is becoming a modern, ethnically diverse country where Protestants are welcome. I would have no concern about moving to Ireland as an atheist of Presbyterian background.

And why shouldn't I get hung up on borders? I'm sure the Ukrainians are rather hung up on their own border right now.

They are, but the Russians are pretty hung up on it too.

No, there's nothing stopping me from being an Irish Protestant, if I did have a religion. Except where I am, which is Northern Ireland. Religion is simply one more difference. A very much so fought over one. The Catholic majority Republic does not like Protestant Northern Ireland people. That is simple truth. And why should I be defined, yet again, as something that I'm not, and something which doesn't even like me?

But you wouldn't be defined as a Catholic Irishman. I suppose I'm talking about a "New Ireland" that's developing now.

And a United Ireland simply won't happen. Not in my generation, anyway. It is deeply ingrained. "No surrender" etc. To do less would be forfeit, which to many is unacceptable.

I agree, it is a distant idea. The only thing that would change things would be if the Catholic population in Northern Ireland form a substantial majority as the Protestant community ages faster and has less children, and if on top of that the Catholic Northern Irish begin to feel distinctly "Irish" rather than just Northern Irish as many do.

Your arguments convinced me that I may be wrong on the matter of Scotland, and that separation may indeed be of benefit...especially when I think and look at my own situation. It would be Scotland and the U.K., only worse. You have same religion, no huge levels of animosity and few legal/political deviations with the rest of the U.K.   Northern Ireland and its separate culture would be sidelined. There is no getting around that.

I remember I saw one Northern Irish fellow commenting on a good Scots song, saying he thought it would make a good national anthem for us post referendum, adding that he hoped "our wee country will follow you out of the Union".

There is a brutal divide between the two parts. Mend it if you will, and I wish you luck, but the differences and old hurts will still be there.

I've thought a lot over the last few years about Northern Ireland and its relationship to the rest of Ireland. In a lot of respects the damage has been done by the divide; the Irish in the Republic often seem like they want nothing to do with the North because it is so different now. I am very much willing to be convinced by the Northern Irish independence movement. You'll notice though that whenever I talk about Northern Ireland joining the rest of Ireland, it would never be at the expense of the province's local autonomy. I think Northern Ireland should be a federal or even confederal state divided into 5 provinces.

Northern Ireland wants Union with Britain. Republic of Ireland doesn't. Northern Ireland has its own identity, its own culture, its own laws, its own education, its own music, its own parades, its own history and its ow ethnic background.

I'm sure that could all be preserved within an Irish federal state, but whether there is enthusiasm for it in the South is the question.

The only reason why Northern Irish people should be called Irish is because of proximity to Ireland. Or unless they expressly want to be called Irish.

As rather a large number of Northern Irish people did and continue to do so.

[TD1]

I did not say a separate country from Britain. A separate country, or to put it better, part of a separate country, from Ireland.

My reason? Why do you not want a closer relationship with France? I think you in fact do. If that came at the price of being called French, legally? Perhaps you could stomach it. I doubt others could.

A lot came after the plantation, too. And more were born from the original planters. In any case, that point matters little in the case of the argument. I think we are on the same page on plantation, anyway.

The use of the Irish, as well as Welsh, language on road signs frankly confuses me. Most do not understand it, and those that do tend to be able to speak English too. I suppose it's preservation of culture. But anyway, I meant by what I said not that Northern Ireland is a separate country in its own right; it is part of a separate county. I didn't see the need to define that more clearly, but I suppose the mistake is my fault.

You know little of carried grudges, then. The vile things I have been called by the Irish (By which I mean Republic of Ireland denizens) is quite frankly disgusting. I have had sandwiches thrown at me. True, in times gone passed it would have been brick or flame; but nevertheless, resentment and feeling is still there. And yes, Ireland projects a good image, and perhaps the majority do feel that way; however, we are happy as we are and do not need nor want United Ireland. And there are still places a Protestant daren't go, or a Catholic. Bad feeling carries through centuries.

Yes, I know they are. And they are trying (Though they are doing it suspiciously) to make it look democratic. They believe Ukraine is theirs. If Ukraine disagrees, I can see force being exerted. My point is, borders are important. As someone seeking independence, I'm sure you can appreciate that.

Either way, it is again a dilemna I neither need to nor intend to face. We do not want United Ireland, nor do we need it. What would be the gain?

That's good for him, but a personal opinion and of little relevance. It still remains that an Ulster as part of Ireland would resemble the plight of Scotland, only worse.

All of those are happening. Except for the last one, which I'm not sure on - I've known a few people who are Catholic and anti-Unified Ireland, but I don't know the proportion.

An Irish Federal state is unlikely to happen for much the same reasons as a Unified Ireland. Many want to be part of Britain. And I doubt it would be preserved, but it simply won't happen anyway.

Yes, a rather large chunk does. It is still a minority.

[Loud Whispers]

Oh my god, it's identity politics all over the thread.

[Digital Hellhound]

Hey, you all Americans can identify as European with the rest of us if you want. Let the whole wooooorld think of themselves as European. It's an Eurocentrist's wet dream.

[scriver]

I certainly don't identify with those barbarians down on the continent. Why, they haven't even advanced past cutting the tail off their piglets.

[MonkeyHead]

The use of the Irish, as well as Welsh, language on road signs frankly confuses me. Most do not understand it, and those that do tend to be able to speak English too. I suppose it's preservation of culture.

Nitpicking I suppose, but Welsh road signs are predominantly place names, and depending where you are in Wales, there may only be a Welsh place name. Depending where you are in Wales, there may be no English spoken at all - such a tendency does not exist in Scotland nor Ireland AFAIK. Granted, near the population centres, a lot less Welsh is spoken, but there is far more to it than simply cultural preservation - it is part of day to day life for a considerable number of people. In a large part the reason why people consider themselves Welsh rather than British is down to differences in culture, of which the language is the most easy to spot.

Spoiler: Proportion of Welsh Speakers around Wales (click to show/hide)

[TD1]

The use of the Irish, as well as Welsh, language on road signs frankly confuses me. Most do not understand it, and those that do tend to be able to speak English too. I suppose it's preservation of culture.

Nitpicking I suppose, but Welsh road signs are predominantly place names, and depending where you are in Wales, there may only be a Welsh place name. Depending where you are in Wales, there may be no English spoken at all - such a tendency does not exist in Scotland nor Ireland AFAIK. Granted, near the population centres, a lot less Welsh is spoken, but there is far more to it than simply cultural preservation - it is part of day to day life for a considerable number of people. In a large part the reason why people consider themselves Welsh rather than British is down to differences in culture, of which the language is the most easy to spot.

Spoiler: Proportion of Welsh Speakers around Wales (click to show/hide)

Sorry for the mistake. I honestly didn't know Welsh was commonly spoken.

[Helgoland]

Well, theres the Native Americans, Aztecs, Maya, and Inca....

You are correct though in that the European part of that history in the Americas is insignificant compared to the millenia of accumulated history in Eruasia.

Though I would question how much you can include Native Americans into that. Most European patriotism is ethnicity-based, so you can actually claim (genetics kind of supports that though nationalists never really bothered with it anyway) to be a descendent of the people who "did" all the history, which most Americans can't. Many Americans seem to view it that way too, trying to establish or maintain some kind of European legacy in their family history.

Now see, I'm American, so obviously I'm indoctrinated and should be ignored, but ethnic nationalism has always struck me as a bad thing, not a good one. Of course, Europe has such a positive history with ethnic nationalism, I'm just crazy. But bear in mind a lot of America isn't European you know. There's a lot of sweeping generalizations you have.

Oh, I'm not advocating that kind of stuff, just explaining it. The ethnic component seems to be - to me at least - an important difference in your standard varieties of patriotism on the different sides of the pond. This makes mutual understanding a bit harder (hence the usual misconceptions of Europeans seeing Americans as extremely nationalistic and Americans thinking citzenship matters when nationality is concerned).

I'd argue that it's not ethnic nationalism, but nationalism of shared history - especially shared embarassment. You're German as soon as you feel German (I don't know how to put it better) about the holocaust.

[Mr. Strange]

You're German as soon as you feel German (I don't know how to put it better) about the holocaust.

Do you mean this feeling?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Helgoland]

Yeah, pretty much

Though it's gotten a lot better since the 2006 soccer world championship.. Sport can actually have a positive political influence~

[Owlbread]

So the Scottish musician Paolo Nutini wrote this song. Though it's about many things, he always points people to it if they ask him about the referendum.

Spoiler: Here are the lyrics. (click to show/hide)

We are proud individuals
Living for the city
But the flames
Couldn’t go much higher

We find God and religions
To bait us with salvation
But no one, no nobody
Can give you the power

To rise
Over love
Over hate
Through this iron sky that’s fast becoming our mind
Over fear and into freedom

Oh, that’s life
That’s dripping down the walls
Of a dream that cannot breathe
In this harsh reality
Mass confusion spoon fed to the blind
Serves now to define our cold society

From which we’ll rise
Over love
Over hate
Through this iron sky that’s fast becoming our mind
Over fear and into freedom

You’ve just got to hold on
You’ve just got to hold on

[Charlie Chaplin’s speech from The Great Dictator]
“To those who can hear me, I say - do not despair. The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed - the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish... Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men - machine men with machine minds and machine hearts! You are not machines! You are not cattle!... You are men! You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure.... let us use that power - let us all unite.”

And we’ll rise
Over love
Over hate
Through this iron sky that’s fast becoming our mind
Over fear and into freedom
Into freedom

From which we’ll rise
Over love
Over hate
Through this iron sky that’s fast becoming our mind
Over fear and into freedom
Freedom, freedom

Oh, rain on me
Rain on me
Rain on me

We haven't had many independence songs from popular musicians in the last few years, but I think this is a good enough stab at it.

[Loud Whispers]

I was jokingly implying that Europe has the whole history.

Not just American of course. African History, Asian History, all history.

Yep.

Big Bang? Totally happened in Europe.

You need to realize that the Universe is really just an extension of Europe.

In all seriousness though is anyone at all surprised why modern history is eurocentric? Aside from regional histories people are intrigued by how Europe up until WWI had gone from being arse backwards to being unrivaled superpowers, and the events that led to this is still studied to this day because the history is fresh new ground... For history at least. Rest assured were China to have looked abroad for Empire instead of Europe, we'd be learning the achievements of Cao Cao not Caesar.