Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Enclosed documents | |
Author: Ron | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 18:50:20 01/23/05 Sun In reply to: Ed Harris (London) 's message, "Smashing." on 18:47:48 01/23/05 Sun The enclosed documents were photocopies of instances where the party has brought up commonwealth activities in the past, and also the relevant sections of their manifesto. A bit dry but promising. The time has come for the Anglo-Saxon peoples to unite. Like Del Boy says "you know it makes sense". Common language, common history, and a common future I hope. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: can I play if I'm not Anglo-Saxon? | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 21:44:06 01/23/05 Sun I must say that any activity based on ethnicity or race sounds evil to me. What I am interested in is a federation of countries that are essentially British in culture and institutions: Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. I feel much more connected to people of absolutely any ethnic background that share this basic culture and value these institutions than I do to people who may look similar to me but have fundamentally different values. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: Well Ian... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:54:17 01/23/05 Sun I tend to feel that the over-use of the term "Anlgo-Saxon" is the direct consequence of there not being an official name for the "countries which are essentially British in culture and institutions". It's a mouthful, you must admit that, so it tends to get shortened. The terms to which we shorten your accurate phrase "countries which are essentially British in culture and institutions" are all inadequate, for one reason or another. 'English-speaking', as I have occasionally noted, is inappropriate because it implies that it is an amazing cosmic coincidence that we share a language, and ignores the historical reasons why we all speak that language. 'Anglo-Saxon', as you sensibly point out, is poor because its literal meaning indicates a racial group which is only a part of the 120 million people we're trying to describe. I have noticed a tendency on this forum to use the term 'british' with a lower-case 'b', but this in itself is problematic, because it is just a reaction to the modern tendency to use 'British' to describe the inhabitants of the British Isles only, which is of course a very recent corruption of its more comprehensive meaning. As a result, I wouldn't get too worked up about people saying 'the Anglo-Saxon world' to mean Greater Britain in the Dilkeite or Seeleyan sense: I'm Judo-Irish and it doesn't bother me. It doesn't necessarily indicate a desire for racial cohesion, it is just a reminder of the inadequacy of our existing terms of self-definition. This is turn is just a reflection of the fact that we have been subdivided into various competing countries in almost imperceptible stages, with political and constitutional changes coming faster than our terminology can match. The purpose of the FCS is to give life to the 'country which dare not speak its name', and in the process to find a proper name for it. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: using terms that sound like race just sounds dangerous to me | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 00:33:11 01/24/05 Mon Most Australians - pro-British or not - are very proud of the way we have dealt with very mixed immigration over the last half century or so. Anything that sounds like we are unhappy with that or that we are talking about a 'white' club will cause enormous problems and be very hard to talk down. I'd rather not let that kind of line take hold, even though I run the risk of sounding petty in the process. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Fair enough. | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 00:37:14 01/24/05 Mon I understand that the term may be controvertial because of its undertones; I was just pointing out that it is not usually meant in that way. I'm sure you know that anyway! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |