Multiculturalism! Rargh!

Well we'll have to agree to differ on that, because differ is what I do.

Well then, let me ask you this: am *I* an Englishman? I can tell you that the three generations of my family above mine are all from the Midlands, but how far back do I have to go to before I cross the line? My grandmothers' maiden names were Riley and Shaw, which suggests an Irish heritage. Do I have to go on one of these family tree sites to discover whether I'm English or Irish?

You can't possibly be an Englishman if you use an expression like "go in goals".

"I'm not clear who is forcing who to look at people in broad race terms. I'm also not clear who's stopping Karl from writing about football and fish&chips if he wants to." My understanding is that Karl felt there is such pressure to 'show tolerance' or 'celebrate' ethnic minorities that people who celebrate aspects of being white and English are pigeonholed as racists. Like when Morrissey went on stage draped in the Union Jack - the idea that something is keeping British patriotism down in case it offends those of different origin. I think there *is* that pressure from some quarters, and the reaction to that is people pursueng an identity based on being anything other than the celebrated minorities. They strive more ardently for a sense of unity with other white Britons. In essence, it does more harm than good - it drives a wedge between white and black, and tells those on the 'white' side that they're not as special. The thing about you writing a poem about being white and English: in one sense, every poem you write about yourself deals with this. Ditto me and Paul. As far as I can see, the only advance upon this is to write a poem that is about being white and English in a general sense ie. attributing certain feelings, tastes and experiences directly to a state of white Englishness. The problem with this is that it automatically implies that anyone who is white and English shares these traits. It's a generalisation, a strong step towards stereotyping. You'd be saying: white Englishness is this, black Englishness is not. And yes, when people write poems, say, specifically about being poets, they're doing the same thing. They're saying, "this is the difference between poets and not being poets." It's arguable whether there are certain traits that make poets stand out, and often you might disagree with the statements made. One of my poems starts, "A poet is separated from his poems and birth and must spend hours regathering them." As a poet, you might well say that's balls, because it doesn't apply to you. The difference is thus: we *know* (or at least, firmly believe,) there's a difference between a poet and a non-poet - something that marks out the true poet - otherwise there'd be no need of the title. We just don't really know what it is. Whereas we know there *needn't* be any difference between white and black people, except what is directly implied by the words - that whites are pale-skinned, and blacks dark-skinned. It's superficial. Trying to find other differences - *deeper* differences - between the two is unnecessary, and the project of supremacist groups on both sides. Unless your poem were to be purely on the subject of what white skin is like (plaster of paris?) it contributes to a gulf that anti-racism efforts have tried to erase for centuries.

Geeko - the correct spelling is Kieslowski.

There, I KNEW you were no bloody Englishman Shackless. OK Jon, for the purposes of this discussion, as far as I'm concerned to be an Englishman you have to originate from Anglo-Saxon stock. (Yes I know Stormy, the Saxons originated in Saxony and the Angles in Geometry, but 'Eng'-land is the land of the Engs or Angles) So you call yourself what you want Jon, as does Shacky, but I know even though I was born in Uxbridge and have lived in south east England for practically all of it I am not and will never be an englishman. I accept that I am British though not altogether exactly proud of it.

Wow, the longest discussion ever, catching up this evening took ages... but i got stuck on the point made by Hen around no. 57 on this thread: >>To borrow a joke from Bernard Matthews, that means if a dog's born in a stable it's a horse!<< Erm.... Bernard Matthews is that bloke on TV that sells plasticised turkeys, the Turkey King... the Bernard quoted is the well-known comedian and white supremacist, Bernard Manning. Just so there's no confusion, like.

Oh yeah.

Hen, "Unless your poem were to be purely on the subject of what white skin is like (plaster of paris?) it contributes to a gulf that anti-racism efforts have tried to erase for centuries." As, I'm sure you'll agree, do poems about having black skin. I personally wouldn't write a poem about being white and English. It's just not that important to me. I find myself baffled, therefore, when people find it important - and imagine others would find it interesting - when they write poems about being black and African. Who cares? I'm just a bloke, as is the guy writing about his own skin colour. However, there is something to be said for valuing the differences, just as much as there is for searching out the similarities. Whenever hetrosexuals make love they're certainly valuing the differences. And when people with different coloured skin make love, they may well be valuing the differences also. To finish off I have to concur with a lot of what David's written on this topic, and find myself challenging Theo Logical's words when he/she writes, "The best poems are always the ones that about being a human being, not about being white, black, from Milton Keynes, depressed, a bricklayer, vengeful, or drunk." In whose opinion, Theo?

I have to say I do agree with Hen's post. It is what you identify with to a certain extent. Of course, though, if I decided that I was Scottish because my great grandfather was scottish, it wouldn't actually work unless I went lived there, being born in England of West Indian parents & lived here all my life.

Now that this thread has turned into a 'that's my view and the lady is not for turning' thing, perhaps Spag could post and put an end to it for all time?

I'm not sure if it's entirely relevant to the discussion, but just for the hell of it ......... It’s about bowling a maiden over It’s appreciating the skill of a tight-head prop It’s remembering 1966 It’s knowing what Roger Bannister did It’s not about a hooligan’s prowess on the terraces It’s about Shakespeare and The Beatles It’s appreciating a painting by Constable It’s remembering what happened at Dunkirk It’s knowing what Charles Darwin did It’s not about exposing yourself on a package holiday It’s about a curry after a few beers It’s appreciating a plate of bangers and mash It’s remembering what happened to Captain Scott It’s knowing what Poppy Day is all about It’s not about drinking yourself stupid in a foreign bar It’s about the freedom of democracy It’s appreciating the vagaries of the weather It’s remembering when we won the Ashes It’s knowing what Last Night Of The Proms is about It’s not about being white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant It’s about simple pride in your country It’s appreciating your neighbour’s difference It’s remembering your grandparent’s sacrifices It’s knowing your children will fight any tyrant, anywhere It’s about being an Englishman [%sig%]

In celebrating our differences we are celebrating our similarities because it is human nature to celebrate.

That is excellent!

Hmm. Doesn't do it for me. Presumably, it's about being an Englishman born before 1966? Karl - I agree about valuing the differences between people, but those differences are between individuals - what I'm against is the idea that there are generalised distinctions between people who are black and people who are white, other than that one kind has black skin and the other white skin. That includes my objection to someone standing up and saying, "Because I have black skin, I am more oppressed than you." If they've grown up privileged, in a wealthy family, had a good education etc. then it's simply a lie. Claiming what happened to someone else implicitly happened to you, just because they've got the same skin colour as you, is as misguided as hating a black man because another black man broke the law. It's all about the implications of colour. Either we, as David suggests, explore what it means to be white, or black, or we accept that it means nothing. Your culture means something - where you grew up and who you are. But culture, as I've said, is different for everyone, and not dependent on race.

lol I see Polish Mark i still pedantic. I am actually writing a novel about racism. I have first hand knowledge of it and our so called multicultural soceity. I'd expand more on my views but i am too tired lol

Hello, may I put in my two cents worth? I'm not asking everybody to love me and I'm certainly not going to love any one that I dont like. That's the core of the problem here. The people who fight against discrimination and those who discriminate are on the same side when it comes to asking us to take their side in this, hate every one who looks like them or love everyone who look like me. I pass, I am as I said before only going to love persons whom I like and am not hating anyone because that takes too much energy! Bye now!

Shack That was brilliant and after reading Shack's posts elsewhere that his background is very mixed I do appreciate what he is saying. My dad is West Indian, he loves cricket & obviously wants the West Indies to win. But, when England play anyone apart from the West Indies he supports England. He's not English though. I want the West Indies to win, am I English? The reason I hesitate is that I am seen as black. People ask me questions like "were you born over here?" If I was white, I wouldn't be asked that. Hen That point is just so ridiculous. Someone who is black and going to a private school, living say in Surrey in an all white community is so much more likely to suffer racism than me. I was brought up in London, going to a state school, encountered prejudice but I couldn't really say that I have suffered racism. That is an active effort to stop me receiving equal rights and my parents did suffer racism as many other races have done. If someone is prejudiced, I think they are ignorant, I obviously will not get on with them (and that goes for someone who is black and is negative towards other races). But it is their problem and as long as they leave me alone, I'm not bothered. Look at two incidents that happened at QPR this week. Two "fans" were ejected from the ground and banned for life for abusing people racially. I'm sorry, but if one of those people didn't happen to be Ian Wright, it would've gone unnoticed, well not unnoticed but unacknowledged. Spag Can I read it when you've finished?

Be nice Stormy. Hen said something that made me look from another point of view. :-)

Argh! I can see why you might think I was referring to you, Sab, as my post followed your's but I would hardly say 'not for turning' if you have changed your mind would I? I was refering to missi who has refused to shift position on his definition of being english no matter what anyone says to him. I used 'lady's not for turning' because missi is also 'Ladywriter' and I know he hates Thatcher. My ref to Spag dates back to a time when it seemed every thread ended after he posted and is nothing to do with you and spag of more recent times. Sorry, I'll try and be clearer in the future.

We've had the discussion about who is English before Sadbelle. You are definitely not English and never could be, anymore than I could. To be English you have to born of English stock and neither of us are. You are at best, part English (I don't know where your mother originates). I am half Italian. a quarter Belgian and a quarter Scottish (although there is some family disagreement over the Scottish bit). What we both ARE, is 'British' however, the two things are NOT the same. We are British citizens of mixed origin as are a high percentage of others. I find myself in agreement with Jon with regard to ethnic groups claiming discrimination by association, that is patent bollocks. Discrimination is a personal thing though I accept it is widespread around the globe. We are all discriminated against in various circumstances. Racial prejudice is a cancer on the human race wherever it occurs.

Well, that's pissed on my parade. There was me thinking I was English, but I 'spose the Italian, Kiwi and Scot blood, and the welsh name counters that...

Well, my great grandfather was Scottish, my great grandmother was part Arawak Indian what does that make me? A person I hope, cos I sure don't belong to any nation, tribe or people at this rate. Missi you're footballist ;-). That's a prejudice too.

With only similarities and no differences the discussions would have been sooooo pale. [%sig%]

OK Storms I thought you were being sarcastic as I had relented on one point. I wasn't referring to the Spag comment.

> I was refering to missi who has refused to shift position on his definition of being english no matter what anyone says to him < I see, I'm supposed to change my mind because those with better insight and superior arguments tell me I'm wrong! Well I'm very sorry but I've listened (or rather read) everything posted on this thread. I've absorbed it all and cogitated, but I find no argument that I think convincing for changing my stance. Being in a minority, whether it be a minority of one or not, doesn't necessarily make me wrong. In anycase as you so rightly point out Colin, it is MY definition of what constitutes an Englishman, as it happens I don't really give a toss about being one or not, what's so great about belonging to a nation noted for it's duplicity and drug dealing anyway? Shacky, do I mis-read you or are you pissed off with me for some reason?

Viva the human race, Sab. I'm with you on this one. Watford f.c., as I'm sure you're aware, has a big anti-racism movement. My little boy has a Watford poster on his wall with the slogan, "Show Racism the Red Card" emblazoned across it. (I think they mean colour prejudice as opposed to racism, but the word racism has a better ring to it). Watford has a zero-tolerance policy regarding this. They will arrrest and prosecute without fail. With a Peckham-born mother and a Harlesdon-born father I'm as Anglo-Saxon as it's possible to be (even tracing my lineage back to the Saxon kings), but my Grandmother was Irish, so I can only claim to be three-quarter English. Viva the human race.

Are you the bloke who went to the south pole, if you are then you're mental.

I'm also prejudiced against thieves, rapists, tories. greedy capitalists, murderers......the list is endless.

Can I just say what an excellent thread this is! I would like to come back on a number of the points made but have too much to do today to take an hour out to do so. But, without being in the slightest patronising, well done all!

George, I didn't say you were wrong, merly that you pop up after each post and say words to the effect of "well, I don't care what anyone says, my definition is correct!" and you just did it again. Perhaps we are all partly correct and partly wrong? My comment was meant in a lighthearted way since the discussion appeared to be coming to an end. I hadn't intended responding again but now I think I'll have one last try. I think your definition is too tight. I doubt many, if any, who claim to be English, can do so under your strict parameters and therefore the term 'English' which means 'people from the country called England' should cease to be. I'm not saying I'm proud to be English or that I feel I belong to England, it's just a fact. I know my passport says I am British but let's suppose we get rid of the royals next week and Scotland and Wales become independant, then each country would have its own passport system and you and I, whether we like it or not would be English and not British anymore. You say Americans would describe themselves with their ethnic background as a caveat. Really? I've yet to meet one. I think they would only say that if asked the ethnic question and not, "what nationality are you?" They do tend to say, however, 'fifth generation American' for example - a kind of class system they have to prove they are more American than anyone else - which, under your guidelines, is rubbish. They ought to say, 'hell no ma'am, I'm twenty percent each of english, irish, scots, welsh; ten percent italian; five percent french and five percent unknown' Although stretching things too far, that could be possible. Then, you would have to analyse the roots of their ancestors five generations back to see 'their' background and so on. Pointless. Your argument applies to most nationalities. Very few are 'pure' in your 'aryan' sense. I bet there is a high percentage of 'true scots' who have had a bit of Angle in them over the centuries yet still claim to be of pure celtic (whatever that is) blood. I think being 'English' is a constantly changing definition and I like that. To say to people, as you have in this thread, 'you are not english because you have parents from (insert somewhere else here)' only re-inforces separatism. As a parting thought, if you believe in Darwinism there is the possibility that you and I are related and all forumites are cousins. If you believe in God and Adam and Eve then we are definitely related. Night, night, cuzzun billybob.

I wish I'd been well done Tony, unfortunately I'm short on offers at the moment.

Thank you Argyll At the moment, living in Scotland seems very inviting - a friend of a friend bought a 6 bedroom house for £120,000. That's heaven compared to the over-inflated prices in London. I really love Scotland and the people. I've always been made welcome when I've been on holiday up there. Funny enough, the only racism I encountered was from English people who'd actually "emigrated" to Scotland!!!!

well this is all very interesting...one of the things i feel is important is to separate the official from the personal. the question of who is british is reasonably [though not entirely] clear, as it is a matter of nationality more in the sense of citizenship than ethnicity...i think this is the point that mississippi has been labouring to make... i think it is a mistake however, to attempt to make a similarly clear distinction between who is and is not english...it is evident from many of the comments here that in the absence of an accepted definition people have their own sense of what is meant by the word ...it can be reasonably assumed that anyone who thinks of themselves as english has their own reason to do so - ancestry, place of birth, upbringing, where their home is - the point being that they *feel* they are english... i suspect for many people it simply does not matter whether they are considered or feel they are english or not...but to some it does matter both ways...if mississippi feels he is not english then i cant imagine that anyone would disagree...to do so would at best be pointless and at worst offensive... it strikes me as a dangerous thing to tell someone who feels english that they are not...tho i am certain that mississippi is not malicious in doing so... like sabelle i am mixed race, but unlike her i am unsure of my englishness and it is only recently that i have admitted the importance to me of such things one thing that i am absolutely certain is that i do not want anyone else to tell me whether or not i am english

Oh Stormy. You want to rile good ol' Spag up? Well you wont succeed. Lets test this one, eh? See if the thread dies. Yes Sabelle you can but will I get it back? I could go on for hours and argue like a few of you have. I was born In England, raised in ireland and moved back here. I am half Irish half English. I consider myself English. I have encountered my racism in my life than most white english people could speak up on it but I wont. I am too tired.

I'm a mammal, as were my parents, although I believe that way back some of my ancestors were amoeba. Sorry, but at 3.30am this thread reads like an argument about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I just want to go to sleep. [%sig%]

Robert you misunderstand. Even though I argue for the right to be counted as English if I was born here, I don't see myself as English. I see myself as West Indian, but some of my friends feel "English" and that is their right.

I think you misunderstood me, David. I wasn't suggesting poems should be abstract in anyway, as much context as possible please - as I already said. But if you self-consciously write about how it feels to be a white Englishman, it'll be crap, honestly. Much better, I think, to write how it feels to be you. As Shackleton proves (I hate what he wrote) , poems that claim to know what it is to be from a certain culture will get a very mixed response. To some people, Shack (and, no, not me), being English DOES mean making a tit of yourself abroad: why should it not be, just because you disapprove? The way your poem neatly claims that all the good things you as a person do right define English culture, and all the things you don't do wrong are nothing to do with it - makes me slightly queazy. In whose opinion Karl? Most people's. For a poem, song, novel, or whatever to be great, widely loved, it must strike a chord, tap into something fundamental to everyone (or at least most people) not a group, or a culture, or what you claim is a culture. But if you look again, you actually agree with me on this anyway. Right, I'm gonna have a go at doing a poem on this now: beware! [%sig%]

"That point is just so ridiculous. Someone who is black and going to a private school, living say in Surrey in an all white community is so much more likely to suffer racism than me." Let me clarify the point. If they've been abused personally, they've been abused personally. But, if they've had a priveleged life, and suffered relatively little abuse, it's a lie to say that they're more oppressed purely because of their colour. That kind of attitude, saying 'I'm different because I'm black', feeds racial prejudices. They should be saying the opposite, 'Being black doesn't make any difference. What's important is who I am.' "I'm also prejudiced against thieves, rapists, tories. greedy capitalists, murderers......the list is endless." Quibble: 'Prejudiced' literally indicates that you prejudge them - but 'rapists', 'thieves' and 'murderers' are defined by their guilt. So you're saying, "I pre-judge the judged." Kinda like saying, "I think beautiful women are good-looking." You can, however, be prejudiced towards tories, since it's conceivable that a tory could be guiltless. Unlikely, but conceivable!

Today I cried. At some point in my life, a loved one died. On another occassion, my wife left me. This was cancelled out by the birth of the baby we thought we couldn't make. The new love was not best pleased, and came round here to choke me. I spent fifteen years being laughed at in a job I despised. I hated getting up, dressed, disguised. Now it's too late. I still shudder when I drive past those school gates. This is how it feels to be a white Englishman, needless to say. I don't think a black person would ever feel quite this way. [%sig%]

poem seems to make sense and say something worth saying until the last 2 lines when it shoots off the scale past explanation, past misunderstanding into the realms of bewilderment. Human experience is human experience. "how it feels to be a white Englishman.... " "needless to say"???? One thing we have in common with everyone who is human is that we all have feelings. So I can't get any sense out of the idea that "a black person would (not) feel this way".

Well, I'll resist explaining, in the hope somebody else understood the last two lines... Hen?

Well, obviously it's not meant to be taken literally, but I am a bit stumped. I was looking for the evidence that 'no black person would ever feel quite this way' referred to a feeling of anti-black racism, but it doesn't seem to be in there. I'm not sure exactly what's happened to the poet - who is 'the new love'?

Quibble quibble. I used the word 'prejuduced' because it was the word levelled at me, I'm aware of the meaning, it didn't occurr to me that it was 'quibblers' day today.

Oh dear, I've mis-fired if even Hen doesn't get it. First, "the new love" was at first "the new bloke" (to internally rhyme with "choke" but the internal rhyme was getting to be too much anyway) -so it originally referred to his wife's new lover, but I preferred in the end the ambiguity of the "the new love" as this COULD mean the narrator's new love. It's up to the reader, and I hope the reader interprets things in a way that relates more to him or her. You don't like everything on a plate, do you Hen! The last two lines are so ironic, they're actually made out of iron. I was playing the part of someone who believes his own experiences express perfectly what it is to be white English. This doesn't occur to us till the end. You, as a reader, may relate to all, some or none of them - but the idea that it's a white English way to feel is ludicrous. MORE ludicrous that a black person couldn't feel that way. Because, though he thinks he's writing about being white English, he's actually writing about being a person. I didn't have him writing about pricey petrol and chippies, because that would have turned too many people off straight away (delicious though, I'm sure, the irony would have been (!))

"If they've been abused personally, they've been abused personally. But, if they've had a priveleged life, and suffered relatively little abuse, it's a lie to say that they're more oppressed purely because of their colour. That kind of attitude, saying 'I'm different because I'm black', feeds racial prejudices. They should be saying the opposite, 'Being black doesn't make any difference. What's important is who I am.'" I wouldn't necessarily use the words oppression and abuse but the historical experience of racial and religious groups is fundamentally important to the experience of those groups today. Millions of black people were taken out of Africa and forced to work as slaves in 'the new world', including on British run plantations in the Caribbean. Once the British ruling class had exploited these people for huge profits, we pissed off, leaving their countries in such a state that many had no choice but come over to Britain and do menial work (that people in Britain refused to do) for low pay so that our post-war service sector didn't collapse around it's ears and so on ... These experiences, which represent the historical experiences of some black people fundamentally affect the lives of their descendents currently living in this country. This history is not taught in most of our schools. The historical experience of our ancestors has some importance most of us but, when that experience involved hundreds of years of exploitation and injustice, much of which is still barely acknowledged by the society which you live in and whose rulers were responsible for perpetrating it, it's understandably likely to be more important. Are you seriously saying that because many black people refuse to treat their date of birth as year zero they are guilty of feeding racial prejudice?

Hi folks. Struggling for time tonight. I'd just like to say that I've enjoyed this thread - good healthy debate with very few infantile comments. My poem was a reflection of how 'I' feel to be an Englishman - I'm allowed to do this because I am an Englishman - and I'm a poet. I write a lot of poems that really do give stick to the human race - black, white, brown, in-betweenies and any others that may, or may not, be blessed with alien DNA. My own personal make-up stems from all corners of the British Isles (geographically speaking that includes Eire) - and I have a little smidgeon from a land far to the south. I was born in England, therefore I'm an Englishman. I'm proud of my culture - I'm proud of coming from the same stock as Darwin, Bannister and Scott - I want to be like them. Being proud of being an Englishman has got nothing to do with skintone or age (reference a comment north of here). It's about being part of a rapidly converging culture that includes snippets from all over the place. I am revolted about the antics of some English folk abroad - those who aren't revolted by suchlike, should write a poem extolling the virtues of that aspect of English culture - if the spirit so moves them. Finally ... Sabelle, us mongrols will certainly inherit the Earth. I managed to prise open the vaults of ABC Tales with a big crowbar - saw one of your poems - nice one kiddo. Finally, finally ... Mississippi, I weighed myself with and without them on - no discernable difference. I think you're quite possibly as barmy as I am. Tatty bye. [%sig%]

>> I was born in England, therefore I'm an Englishman. << Have to take issue with you there Shacky. That statement is not true and never was true and can never be true. For a genuine Englishman it is probably a happy coincidence. I was born in Uxbridge Hospital but that doesn't make me English. Is an English collie born in China a Chinese collie? I think you are far barmier than I. I use your family shop in TCR by the way.

"My poem was a reflection of how 'I' feel to be an Englishman." Well, you could fooled me. It sounded a lot like a reflection on what it means to be English (hence the "it's about..." repetition). I couldn't detect any feelings in there, other than with the use of the word "pride". I don't like the way you imply a collective feeling of Englishness (like the makers of that godawful film Two Weddings do). Come on, Shacky, this IS what you were implying, wasn't it...don't back down now! How can you feel pride about being from the same stock as Darwin (I love him too, btw) when - from what you say, you're not really from the same stock? Few of us are (other than toffs). Anyway, we're not saying national pride is wrong (a little misplaced, maybe) just that multi-c fans the fire of culturalism, which causes as many problems as it solves.

Missi, how come you can't spell your own name all of a sudden?