h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>>to paraphrase John F. Kennedy, every human being can say: 'Ich bin ein Afrikaner!'<< (Nite Owl)

Even though it should be "Ich bin Afrikaner(in)" (the brackets refer to a female), I like the way that English has non-gender phrases (Nurse, Teacher, Refuse Collector, Plumber, Welsh, Romanian) for most nouns.

Actually, as we're talking German.

It took until the end of the 1990s for 4th Generation Turks (and other ethnic groups born in Germany) to be acknowledged with dual-citizenship.

Strange, in a country steeped in racial history, that it was allowed to exercise the inability for the children of someone who had a German mother but a father of an alternate ethnic origin to be classed as their *father's* ethnic origin only. Also that those whose parents, grandparents and sometimes great grandparents had lived in Germany all their lives but, because both were from non-German origins, their citizenship was classed as being their ethnic background.

I was in Germany when the "Doppelte-Staatsangehoerigkeit" came in and I embraced it with a passion - to the shock/disgust of some of the people around me.

I still find it remarkable that a European country would close its borders to incoming migrants and then prevent them adequate nationality for their children based solely on their ethnic origin and less upon what they can do for their country - another paraphrase of a JFK quote...

OK i defy anyone to justify the following.....

My 7 year old daughter is to have a non school uniform day, as part of her school May day celebrations.

A letter home from school explained that due to the mixed race of children at school, England shirts should not be worn on this or any other day. It went on to justify this in the usual.. we don't want to offend blah blah blah

OK so i have answered your question .. Define a racist...

A 7 year old girl with an ageing England T-shirt.

Problem solved

Very interesting debate.

I think that the word race is very often not used correctly, but words change meaning as they are used, and the meaning is the more important than the word, so we have to understand the meanings and not just hear the words. That goes for flags and the like aswell. I have no problem with them in general.

I was thinking earlier that an interesting change in 'race' relations that has happened over my lifetime (nearly 21 years) is the increase in the number of tick boxes on forms under 'ethnic origin?' from about 4 (white, black, asian, other-please state) to about a dozen. I joined a library a couple of years ago and I swear there were about 20 different options! I've moved from other-please state(please state?! They never gave me enough space to state adequately so I've stated many different thing over the years, I think the best was indo-welsh) to mixed-white & asian(sounds like it should be special multicultural flavour of crisps!). Also I think it was my UCAS form that had me look up on a table in the notes to find a number to put in the 'ethnic origin' box. So is it less 'racist' the more boxes there are? Would no boxes be better?

Interestingly I turned my computer on to write a letter continuing a correspondance I have started with my MP (Andrew Smith, MP for Oxford East) which started when he sent a 'personal message' telling me all about the work he's doing and has done for the local asian communities. I've only lived in Oxford since September and had no communication with him before, so I can only assume that he got my name by taking asian surnames from the electoral register. Should he be considered a racist?

Chubstar, JFK famously said "Ich bin EIN Berliner". I was paraphrasing, not trying to be GC (grammatically correct).

"JFK famously said "Ich bin EIN Berliner""

"I am a cream-filled donut.", isn't it?

As to the question in the subject line...

How about "someone you disagree with whose prejudices do not precisely match your own".

My ex used to work with a woman who believed her boss was "racist against women". I love that phrase. On that basis, I'm racist against thick people.

H.

<<OK i defy anyone to justify the following.....

<>

Did this ban extend to children from other countries
if not Why not
Or is it only The English who are Racist

What exactly is "taking pride in your country," though? Does it imply taking pride in not being from all the other countries?

Is it being proud of being born there or proud of your own contribution to the place?

And why is it so often expressed in terms of things that happened well before any of us were born?

I was going to ask the question why would you send a child to school in an England tee shirt. But then thought ok maybe it's to be associated with an England team, probably, unfortunately from a personal perspective, football, but why restrict the enthusiasm of a yougster.

Which leads me to where I was before in this discussion what positive aspects come out of being proud of your country. Or, as Kea said, do the racists now set the agends over national pride.

Ive gone to pubs in Glasgow in a club shirt and been stopped.

"Nae colours in here sonny"

"You wont let me in because im not white?"

"No, nae football shirts, yer nae from round here are yea?"

"no this is rugby clubs own shirt"

I got let in

Thing is I can see why some places would have an objection to such things....even in schools.

On the one hand especially on a non-uniform day it is a tremendous restriction on free expression, BUT is it necessary and proportionate.

Is your daughters Englishness being restricted by not allowing her to wear colours something that affiliates her to a state that at this moment is involved in the violent and illegal defacto occupation of another country? No its not.

No one is saying your daughter cant wear a hijab, prayer cap, turban or cross on a chain. These things are protected by law tey are part of peoples chosen cultural/religious identity. Odd as they seem to me I can see the point in legally enshrining the right to display such symbols.

Im remeded of the objection we had when at a PTA event the host ended the night with a chorus of national songs. He said he would avoid anthems because of political correctness. So he sang for songs associated with the home nations. I remember for Ireland it was "Danny Boy" the other two I dont recall. I do recall the line "Bitains never, never..shall be slaves"

Yeah politically correct my @r$e!

He didnt understand the incongruity of singing this infront of the descendants of people enslaved by the British. He couldnt see the problem so obviously it was all right.

Some of you might not understand why England shirts arent such a great Idea in school. Some other people might not understand the reasoning behind not using your mobileon a plane, I bloody dont, but I just take their word for it. I dont assume that because I dont know a reason that there isnt one. So why do peolpe who cant see the reason for removing Noddy Books or England shirts from school assume their lack of knowledge means they know better?

one love

"Britons never shall be slaves"

Is part of the chorus to Rule Britannia, which is not an English song, it's a British song. It's sung as an unofficial national anthem (because, let's face it, unless it's being played by a brass band, God Save the Queen is dull).

The lyrics are: (note to Mods, this is *way* out of copyright, so no need to pull them)

When Britain first at Heav'n's command, Arose from out the azure main;
This was the charter of the land, And guardian angels sang this strain;

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves; Britons never shall be slaves.

The nations not so blest as thee, Shall in their turns to tyrants fall;
While thou shalt flourish great and free, The dread and envy of them all.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves; Britons never shall be slaves.

Still mor majestic shalt thou rise, More dreadful from each foreign stroke;
As the loud blast that tears the skies, Serves but to root thy native oak.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves; Britons never shall be slaves.
STANZA 4:
Thee haughty tyrants ne'er shall tame, All their attempts to bend thee down;
Will but arouse thy generous flame, But work their woe, and thy renown.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves; Britons never shall be slaves.

To thee belongs the rural reign, They cities shall with commerce shine;
All thine shall be the subject main, And every shore it circles thine.


Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves; Britons never shall be slaves.

The Muses, still with freedom found, Shall to thy happy coast repair;
Blest Isle! With matchless beauty crowned, And manly hearts to guide the fair.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves; Britons never shall be slaves.

I know u weren't being GC

Just being *amusing*

I'll stop it now

I can see the justification behind the shirt thing, although I think its probably unlikely that there would be any problems. I remember being at school non-uniform days England shirts would probably be outnumbered by Pakistan shirts, but I don't think we ever got any tribalistic warfare flareing up as a result.

On the third hand, I don't really see the reason for wearing either. Says the sort of proud owner of a Wycombe Wanderers shirt .

Which brings me to a fourth hand. I'm sure schools get as much Arsenal versus Manchester United or even Sonic the Hedgehog versus Mario related violence as race gang warfare.

Someone mentioned how much of our genes humans share with other animals. It of course depends on what animals you choose. I have heard different numbers for how much we share with bonobos which are supposedly our closest relatives. I think the correct one is about 96,7%

Hmmm, I seem to remember originally there were four categories of races. Though I can't remember the name of the last one. I have a book at home, where they have about 20 listed with pictures of examples next to them. Depends on how precisely you define it.

Let us not forget that there is a difference between being prejudiced and being a racist. A prejudice is just an opinion based on inadequate facts. Once you get to know the facts, you might find out you were wrong. You might also find out you were right. I have a prejudice that most Australians are great people, which is a generalisation from the ones I have met so far. Perhaps if I went to Australia it would turn out they're all bastards. Based on the same experiences with Phillipinos, I have a prejudice that Phillipinos are not very pleasant people. One is a prejudice about people of (mainly) the same race as me, the other is about someone a different race than me. Would you feel this qualifies me as a racist?

And wear the England t-shirt. It doesn't matter if it offends, we need to stop this pussy-footing that's happening in the western world. The British did amazing things in the past, I certainly think you have something to be proud of. Which is more than I can say for some other countries. Sure, you did some mistakes but eggs and omelettes. I don't like this whole post-imperial guilt you Brits have. Look at the spanish, the way they f*cked up South America. If anything they are the ones who should be feeling bad.

I can't really understand feeling guilt or pride about history so far before my time.

But the British Empire was a very nasty operation, albeit not the nastiest. I think the Turks or possibly the Belgians probably win that.

I think the most important part of being proud of one's country's achievements and guilt about detractions, is that in looking to the past one can hopefully end up looking to the future and hoping that we can take the experiences of the one towards the other.

In other words we can define our future by noting our past.

As to the question why would i send my daughter to school in an England shirt... come on... she's 7 years old and i am too scared to argue her choice of clothes, non school uniform day, means she can wear what she wants, surely.

I personally think that as it was a football shirt, and she is a big football fan (for her age), the fact that it has the george cross on it should not come into question. She is not making a political statement, she is not being racist, she is not taking her school to the high court so that she can wear the clothes relevant to her religion. I can't quote facts about this because i don't even know what religion the girl i am refering to was or how her attire is associated to her religion. I just remember sketchy details about it and i know she won the case.

<< non school uniform day, means she can wear what she wants, surely.>>


Indeed, surely!

Don't call me Shirley

But the fact that the school is highlighting to 7 year olds that the George Cross is offensive to others, potentially racist and potentially showing a superioriness over other races just reinforces that myth rather than either ignoring it and letting them where it or letting them where it and explaining that there is nothing wrong in wearing the flag of your own country (like the americans do all the time) be proud of your country and your heritage.

And as I would assume most of those 7 year olds were born in England they too are English so how can they be offended. Yes, the Empire did is iffy things but we aren't doing them now. It is just over-sensitive people with no perspective who are linking things we did over a hundred years ago to what we are like now.

The George Cross should be wrestled back from the BNP and other racist organisations. This school has put that back by their actions.