RAH - On race, nationalism, identity and belonging

". . . . it seemed to us that Wales was on the way to becoming a true modern nation, proud and young and eager, throwing off the tiresome shackles of Britishness, and making of itself something at once brilliantly new and loyally old".

I like that, especially the bit about "throwing off the tiresome shackles of Britishness", and with it the primitive, inherently exploitative power structures of this nation state.

[darknight]: "It doesn't matter where you were born - it's what you do with the rest of your life that's important."

Is that really true? Certainly not for me. Although, it is not so much a matter of where I was born, but where my ancestral, cultural and historical roots lie, without which I wouldn't have a clue "what to do with the rest of my life", except perhaps, consume, consume, consume.

Are you suggesting that an Englishman, for example, living (even born) in Wales is as much a Welshman as someone whose ancestors have lived there for many generations? Are you perhaps someone who loathes human (ethnic, cultural and historical) diversity and craves to see it dissolve and disappear in the "melting pot" of human homogeneity, stirred by the economic forces of mass human migration and globalization, political opportunism and an extreme racial ideology which insists that race does not exist, or if if does, has no social relevance, except in respect to "racism"?

2nd Post

[yakaboo]: "Fuck my ancestors - bloodthirsty, bigoted, boring bastards the lot of 'em. Thank God we've moved on."

There we have at least one fundamental difference in attitude which separates us. To me, what you express there seems like self-hatred and self-contempt. How can you have so little respect and appreciation for those to whom you owe so much?

How and whoever my European ancestors were, I owe to them, collectively, at least (and here I'm thinking of European civilization), everything, including my respect and gratitude. If we've "moved on", as you suggest we have, as far as I'm concerned, it is thanks to them.

[darknight], I doubt that I can respond adequately to your long and moving response, but will do my best.

We ALL need a sense of identity and belonging, because we are extremely social animals, the emotions and behaviour of which evolution adapted to life in an extended family group (long before the advent of civilization), and which in modern society are brutally neglected (especially in your case) and misused by those who seek to exploit them to their own advantage (especially the state, but also religions, sects, institutions, companies, brands, political parties, etc).

The extended family group (or clan) we once belonged to and depended on, has gone. Now we depend on the state and the possession of money. This has brought many advantages, of course (especially to those with plenty of money), but left us gravely lacking and disoriented, which we are driven to try and correct or compensate for (modern consumerism, to a large extent, is one form of compensation, briefly stilling an emotional hunger that only genuine community and belonging could satisfy).

The thing is, we cannot ALL belong to the SAME community (clan), as Gordon Brown would have us believe, insisting that all British passport holders share a common "national identity", that is supposed to satisfy our deep emotional need for a sense of community and belonging. "British identity" is a lie (a myth) and delusion to facilitate the functioning of the nation state, the original, primary and continuing purpose of which is the "exploitation" of society, notwithstanding that it also provides services we depend on.

When someone feels strong bonds of identity with a particular group (whether one's family, company, nation, religion, football team, or whatever it is we project these feeling on to), outsiders are naturally inclined to feel excluded, possibly threatened, resentful, or inferior (thus the assumption that the in-group is asserting itself as superior). When a group of black people get together and exclude non-blacks they are expressing a natural sense of "black identity". When a group of white people does the same they are being "racist".

Many (especially Christians and those on the political left) seek a sense of identity and belonging, quite abstractly, in humanity as a whole, the ideology of which also binds them (more concretely) to their Christian or political brethren, while giving them a sense of moral superiority, if not of self-righteousness.

It is up to each of us to seek, establish and cultivate our own sense of identity and belonging, while accepting that others do the same, provided they (and we ourselves, of course) do so in a humane and civilized fashion. We are naturally inclined to want everyone to belong either to our OWN group or to some other RIVAL group. This is what most of the misunderstandings, and abusive exchanges, here on CiF centre around. We have to learn to distance ourselves to some extent from our particular affiliations (group identities), so that we can interact (even be friends) with individuals of other affiliations and identities without trying to convert them to our own.

My European ancestry, culture and history are central and essential to my own sense of identity and belonging, which Gordon Brown, of course, wouldn't like one bit. He wants me to identify with multi-racial/multicultural Britain, and HIMSELF as Britain's leader. But I don't, not emotionally, and notwithstanding my continuing dependency on the British state. Thus my desire for an alternative political, social and economic order - one with parts (of my own choosing) that I can embrace and identify with, and which isn't out to control or exploit me .

[darknight], I suggest there is far more to your ancestry, culture and history than you are aware of (and one needed be too rigid or unimaginative about it), but maybe these are things you do not wish to identify with. Perhaps this is just my way. As I've already said, we each need to seek, establish and cultivate our own sense of identity and belonging, but in a civilized fashion, i.e. without attacking or rubbishing others (even if we are envious of them, as I am, for example, to some extent, of the Jews).

3rd Post

[yakaboo]:" . . .the reference to my Jamaican sister-in-law . . . was aimed at rogerhicks, who would have my brother arrested if he could."

I beg your pardon? I would defend your brother's right to marry whoever he chooses, which from previous exchanges we have had, you must know - so why the lie and slur?

Because, I suggest, your nephew is, you want us ALL, eventually, to become mixed-race.

Those who want to mix should be free to do so, but please, don't keep saying, or insinuating, that those of us who want to retrain and cultivate our ethnic identity as native Europeans are "racists".

You wouldn't dream of calling native Americans, Australians, Africans or whoever "racist" if they expressed a preference for retaining their own ethnic identity rather than mixing with European colonialists - would you? Perhaps because, in your eyes, they do not deserve to be punished, as wicked Europeans do, who for centuries have been taught by Christianity to hate and despise themselves as sinners (and now, since sex no longer works, as "racists", which does, of course).

Neither do I HATE multicultural, or multi-racial, society, provided it is not simply a cover - as ours IS - for a "melting pot" with the ideological purpose (conscious or not) of homogenizing ethnic and cultural diversity, and destroying in the process any latent sense of common ancestry, history or ethnic identity amongst the native population.

This suits "the state" nicely, of course, which can dismiss as "racist" any ethnically based allegiances which might attempt to challenge its authority, while business is happy to have a steady flow of cheap immigrant labour into the country, irrespective of its origins.

As I've pointed out before, human diversity (ethnic, cultural, linguistic) is the product of human populations having been largely isolated in the past. Bring them together and insist that they all share a common "British" (or whatever) identity, and within a few generations that diversity will largely have dissolved and disappeared into the melting pot of ethnic and cultural homogeneity, a process which the media in this country, particularly the BBC, are energetically encouraging.

Is a majority of the native (or even the immigrant) population happy with this situation? Of course not, but anyone who objects to it is dismissed as a "racist".

[darknight], I'll respond to you tomorrow. Right now I need a Beer (lager), a book and my bed.

4th Post

[darknight]: "I cannot be the only person who has no idea about cultural belonging, surely?"

You are certainly not alone. Rather, your situation is characteristic of modern mass society. It's just that most are too busy working and consuming (shopping, watching TV etc) to notice. As I say, the nation state and money economy, on which we now all depend, have destroyed, but only very inadequately replaced, the family group, clan, "community", we once belonged to and depended upon (and for which human nature is adapted). Some people cope far better than others, especially those who have succeeded in retaining some degree (material and/or imagined) of shared identity and community: Jews provide a good example of this, although their identity and community too is being undermined by the pressures and temptations of modern mass society and the power of the pound (money).

I'm not sure to what extent one can separate cultural identity from ethnic and historical identity. For me they are very much intertwined.

I have to remind myself on occasion that I have sometimes felt more accepted and liked by people of different ethnicity, culture and history to my own than by my "own people". It doesn't persuade me, however, as [yakaboo] thinks it should, to relinquish my ethnic identity and leap into the melting pot (i.e. embrace its ideology).

If we are to create a just, humane and sustainable society (as we must, if our civilization and children are to have a future), we have to move beyond the nation state and free-market capitalism, which currently comprise our socio-economic order, and both of which are deeply rooted in and dependent on our dumb-animal nature and behaviour - unsurprisingly, in view of human origins.

The only way that I can envisage us doing this is for individuals and groups of individuals, with the freedom (we have in the West) to do so, to "self-organize", making use especially, now they are available, of the internet and biometrics (in order to minimize identity deception). This will entail individuals developing a sense of their own (multi-faceted) identity, and of which groups and groups of groups they belong and feel allegiance to. For many, probably most, shared ethnicity, culture and history will play a natural and very important role. The role of the state will be to facilitate the process (although at first, ignorance and vested interests will cause it to offer some resistance), thereby gradually relinquishing much of the power and control it currently has, while ensuring that things proceed peacefully and democratically.

[darknight]: ". . . am I really likely to get racist abuse if I . . . visit [Wales]?"

I remember my father being furious with a Welshman who refused to speak English when, in Wales, he asked him the way. I can understand the Welshman's frustration and dislike of English dominance, but regret that he had to take it out on my father. However, I would not describe his unfriendly and prejudiced behaviour as "racist".

The words "racism" and "racist" are now used - or rather, misused - as words of abuse and slander, to dismiss others or their attitudes as beyond the pale, evil, or morally degenerate. It is considered perfectly legitimate to call anyone (or rather, any white person) showing any kind of racial prejudice a "racist", which is nonsense, because EVERYONE has them. People are full of prejudices (including racial ones) and to condemn selected prejudices as "abhorrent" and "unacceptable" is simply a means of social bullying and control. The Church did it in the middle ages, condemning dissenting views or non-believers as heretics or pagans, and natural feelings and inclinations (especially sexual ones) as "sinful". Now, anyone dissenting from the ideology of race being irrelevant or non-existent (the exact, and equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology - which, of course, is no accident) or admitting to natural feelings of racial prejudice is threatened with or actually branded as being a "racist", i.e. someone completely beyond the pale.

[yakaboo], I'll try to respond to your last post later.

5th Post

[yakaboo]: "I couldn't care less whether there is a melting pot or not. . . . The thing I do care about is how people like you would try and stop it. Makes me shudder.

If you don't care about the melting pot, then you don't care about your own ethnic identity or human ethnic diversity. I care passionately about both.

I don't want to "ban" the melting pot or prevent those who want to from joining it, but I DO want to stop it, if I can, from getting out of control and consuming entirely (or even largely) my own ethnic group, in particular, and human ethnic diversity in general.

I understand your concern for how I think this can be achieved, but there is no reason why it should make you shudder. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Perhaps the melting pot cannot be contained and will eventually consume my own and every other race. The thought makes me rather sad and depressed, but doesn't send me into a "racist rage" or incline me to advocate the use of force or violence to oppose it.

Some of the nicest people I know are mixed race and I'm happy to see more of them, but not everyone, anymore than I'd want everyone to be of "pure" European or Chinese race. What I want is diversity - which the "unconstrained" melting pot you are advocating is a genuine, but largely unacknowledged, threat to.

So, how is the melting pot to be constrained, without causing YOU to shudder?

I have to admit, in the existing socio-economic order of nation state and free-market capitalism it is difficult to imagine, especially since it is economic forces and post-Nazi nation-state politics which are driving mass migration and the ideology of multiracial/multicultural society, in which an individual's race, culture and history are considered irrelevant to national affiliation and loyalty. Never mind the colour of a person's skin (origins), its only the colour of their money (their economic and political usefulness) which interests the political and economic establishment.

But as I'm always pointing out, the structures of state and economy are deeply rooted in our dumb-animal nature (unsurprisingly, in view of human origins) and are thus inherently exploitative, unjust, inhumane and unsustainable. Far from being a consequence of enlightened human behaviour, globalization and the mass migration of million of people from their countries of origin (where they have their own ethnic, cultural and historical roots) to an alien, already, natively and unsustainably, overpopulated Europe, it is a consequence of an economy rooted in and dependent on our dump-animal nature and behaviour, and complete MADNESS.

As I've already said above (addressing [darknight]), the only way I see us replacing the existing politico-socio-economic order - which we have to do - is by "self-organizing" into groups, and groups of groups of our own individual choice. What criteria will we use? That has yet to be established, but I'm pretty sure that shared ethnicity, culture and history for many people, including myself, will have, not exclusive, but nevertheless, a high priority, certainly for one of the main groups which will comprise me multi-faceted identity.

[yakaboo]: "But if anybody, of any race, didn't approve of their children falling in love with someone of a different race, I'd call them racist, yes."

In that case there are an awful lot of Jews, Sikhs, Muslims and others who for you are "racists". Besides which, you are trying to tell people how they should FEEL. If someone marries out of their (ethnic, religious or whatever) group it is perfectly natural for other group members to feel, perhaps very strong, disappointment. And you would condemn that (at least if they gave expression to it) as "racism" and lump them together with the likes of Adolf Hitler.

6th Post

[yakaboo], you remind me of a person who is insanely in love with someone and cannot comprehend that they don't feel the same way. But instead of accepting it you keep going on and on and on, in the expectation that you will wear them down and eventually they will consent to marry you.

You want me to love other races (especially black ones, I get the impression) like you do. But I don't. I don't hate them, far from it, so I'm not a racist, but I don't love them. I love my OWN race. Which is why I do not want to see it dissolve and disappear into your beloved melting pot. But you just cannot understand or accept it, can you? Instead, you consider it "racist" to love one's own race, especially if you are white.

To give a specific or detailed answer to your question is difficult (at the moment, impossible), I confess, free-market capitalism, in its disregard for human beings other than as an exploitable resource, having created through the madness of mass immigration a very unnatural and awkward situation. But if we were free to choose our own groups and society, instead of being herded by the state and market forces, as we are now, a humane and civilized solution, for me, at least, begins to come into focus.

Ultimately, I put my faith in mine and others' love of our own European race, and set it against your indifference and contempt for it. Hopefully, your (brown Afro-European) descendants will be more tolerant of my (white, native European) descendants than you are of me, and not also try coercing them into miscegenation.

Ideally, we need the possibility of continuing this exchange (which is a continuation of exchanges we've had on other threads) on a separate thread, dedicated to it and without a specific time limit. In case any CiF editors are looking in, what about it?

7th Post (unposted because of missed deadline for thread closure)

[yakaboo], Genuine racists are irrationally intolerant of other races, while you, as an "anti-racist", are irrationally intolerant of anyone (especially if they are white) who loves (relates especially strongly too) and seeks to preserve their own race. You obviously loath the very idea that I do, and thus dismiss and condemn it as racism that can only be rooted in a sense of "racial superiority".

Your intolerance, I'm sure, like that of racists, stems from a lack of understanding. You simply do not see where I'm coming from (not that I'm 100 percent sure myself), and thus make assumptions which are way off the mark.

"Do I love BNP members?" Not as individuals (I don't know any), but as members of my own ethnic group, sure. You, I presume, would have me hate them for their "racist" views. Humans have a fatal tendency (rooted in our animal nature, of course) to see the world in terms of "them and us", "goodies and baddies", with ourselves always being one the "goodies", of course. Members of the BNP, for you, have "baddy" written all over them.

Just because I don't love other races as I do my own, does not mean that I lack respect for them, or cannot like or even love individuals members. As I've said before, at a personal, individual level, I find race to be virtually irrelevant (certainly, I'd rather a nice black friend than a lousy white one). Maybe this is where my attitude is difficult for you to understand.

Obviously, the love of one's race, like the love of humanity as a whole, is a pretty abstract affair. The feeling one has towards individuals in personal relationships is something quite different. You, presumably, extrapolate your feelings towards individuals onto humanity as a whole, but that doesn't work with me. I see individuals I know as individuals, but with strangers and as soon as even moderately large numbers are involved, my brain (and heart) sees ethnic groups, which it characterizes and responds to differently. It is not a rigid process, set in cement, but it's there and I cannot ignore it or pretend it does not exist.