English identity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Now we've got to the core of it.

"the English can claim traits which are common in other countries and therefore not ‘English’ at all"

That was as painful as pulling teeth

They are still English traits even if shared with other nations. Are you suggesting that we don't play football just because the Hungarians do as well? It's not even a question of who started it or who copied who. It I am black I'm still black even though the bloke in the bed next to me is Nigerian...

---

Obviously not…I’m suggesting that we can’t use traits that are commonly found in other nationalities to define our ‘Englishness’.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

Again you think wrong

---

Really? You’re seriously suggesting that history isn’t littered with examples from the clergy of those who have behaved uncharitably, cruelly or in an ‘un Christian’ way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Now we've got to the core of it.

"the English can claim traits which are common in other countries and therefore not ‘English’ at all"

That was as painful as pulling teeth

They are still English traits even if shared with other nations. Are you suggesting that we don't play football just because the Hungarians do as well? It's not even a question of who started it or who copied who. It I am black I'm still black even though the bloke in the bed next to me is Nigerian...

---

I’ve had this problem explaining exclusivity on this thread and others in the past. It’s not worth pursuing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Again in your own head. The question was, what makes you English? The list above for me MY WORDS, NOT YOUGOV, sums the race up well. IN NO WAY did I say it was a monopoly. Its your warped sense of put down kicking in again.
I go back to your I am European comment. Of course you are European, But does that trump being English? No it doesn't.
You are a full gold star remainer, who use that line frequently. EU mantra is to water down nationalism to promote the USE.
You don't meet someone from Brazil, with the introduction of "hello I'm Ramanag, I''m European"

---

‘Warped sense of put down kicking in again’. What are you on?
Come back when you’re able to differentiate between politics and geography. I haven’t mentioned the EU or ‘Remain’ once in this debate. All I’ve said is that I identify as European - specifically a Northern European. That’s what I am and there’s no conflict there with being English or British.
No…again obviously I wouldn’t introduce myself to ‘someone from Brazil’ like that…that would be really weird.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Obviously not…I’m suggesting that we can’t use traits that are commonly found in other nationalities to define our ‘Englishness’.

---

Why not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Why not

---

Oh God, here we go again…because when someone speaks of ‘Englishness’ and ‘English identity’ that implies a certain uniqueness.
I genuinely don’t know how we can describe and recognise that uniqueness and neither, apparently, does Mr. Jenrick or the forum’s current three amigos who have rushed to his defence whilst offering…absolutely no further clarity.

Furthermore, when someone describes that ‘English identity’ as being ‘under threat’…unless they can describe exactly what it is that is ‘under threat’ and from where…then the observation appears totally meaningless…imo.

The need for each trait to be unique is in your head only...I don't know why one cannot pick eg 10 characteristics to define English, Welsh, Romanian or Burmese from a pool of perhaps 200 to create a matrix that could approach uniqueness in defining a national image. Each one does not need to be unique but the resultant set might approach that.

So eg English and Burmese might have "polite" German and Russian might have "aggressive" Italians and French "cowardly" etc (some examples more tongue in cheek)

This way you can create a picture using differing components and you don't get into an argument about who can have what and into a scenario where so many characteristics are ruled out due to being shared

And incidentally I'm not rushing to the defence of Jenrick - I'm not even sure what job he does now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

The need for each trait to be unique is in your head only...I don't know why one cannot pick eg 10 characteristics to define English, Welsh, Romanian or Burmese from a pool of perhaps 200 to create a matrix that could approach uniqueness in defining a national image. Each one does not need to be unique but the resultant set might approach that.

So eg English and Burmese might have "polite" German and Russian might have "aggressive" Italians and French "cowardly" etc (some examples more tongue in cheek)

This way you can create a picture using differing components and you don't get into an argument about who can have what and into a scenario where so many characteristics are ruled out due to being shared

---

Okay…that’s how you see it. Imo, even ‘tongue in cheek’, you’re talking stereotypes while I’ve consistently referenced ‘identity’, specifically ‘English identity’ because that’s how the thread originated.

As for Mr. Jenrick…I suspect his job might be that of M.P. don’t you. ;D

I didn't know if he'd lost his seat - but he certainly doesn't seem to have a "shadow identity"

I'm not sure how you differentiate between stereotype and identity: they seem interlinked