|
To:
Guardian CiF |
|||
|
|
|||
|
In response to the Guardian article, "Confident Turkey looks east, not west" by Simon Tisdall on the issue of Turky and Europe.
Link to
article and thread at
The Guardian. |
|||
1st Post, March 26 (9:10 AM):
When I first left England's green and pleasant shores in 1971 (before it was transformed by mass immigration) and visited Western Europe, I felt for the first time that I was English (all those foreign Dutch, French and Germans!). When after a month or so I continued my travels to Turkey, I realized how much more I was a European. Granted, that was over 30 years ago, and a very personal and subjective experience, but it was a genuine culture shock that I've never forgotten, and I'm inclined to take my gut feelings seriously.
Besides which, the Turks are not a European people; nor do they share our European history and culture, as for example the Russians do. It is towards Russian membership of the EU that we should be working, not Turkish.
Let us be on the friendliest possible terms with the Turks, and Kurds, and everyone else, but not pretend (for the sake of strategic and economic opportunism) that they are Europeans. They are not. Certainly not to me - but then I'm just an ordinary native European citizen.
Post (10:28 AM):
I am a native European and identify strongly with my fellow native Europeans, our shared ethnicity (ancestors), history and culture, which goes back to the ancient Greeks and on into prehistory.
This does NOT mean to say there are not many non-Europeans I like a lot more than many fellow Europeans: I'm with native Africans against white apartheid, with African Americans against discrimination and segregation, with native Australians against white discrimination and abuse etc., but I'm STILL (proud and ashamed) a native (ethnic) European. These are MY people, whom I love and hate.
Clear enough?
Post (11:30 AM):
[Peterlee], of course we are all the same (more-or-less) underneath, our common humanity and all that, but what a terribly monotonous and boring world it would be if we didn't acknowledge, cultivate and celebrate our differences!
Also, I want to be true to my feelings. I FEEL a strong sense of European identity: cultural, historical AND ethnic. Notwithstanding the importance of our common humanity (I want us all to live in just peace and harmony), I do not feel a strong sense of pan-global identity, as you seem to. Sorry.
Post (12:07 PM):
[Hostage2Fortune], We have very different attitudes (feelings) and standpoints, and what is your immediate response? To push me toward a corner (a box) with "racists" and evil people.
Unless you want this to end in possible civil war, you should try being as tolerant of differing views and attitudes amongst your own people (assuming that you are a native European yourself) as you are of those of non-European peoples.
If you don't (or don't want to) see yourself as one of "my people", that's OK. It is certainly no reason not to respect each other, or even to be friends (I certainly do not want to be enemies with you - or with anyone else). But I am not going to be told how I should or shouldn't feel, when I cannot even tell myself.
Instead of dismissing me (my attitudes) as (potentially) "racist", try understanding them instead.
Xenophobia (if you understand its broader meaning rather than the narrow, negative, one of "hate of foreigners") is the flip side of a single coin, on the other side of which is the "love of things familiar": "familiaphilia", perhaps.
I am not a xenophobe (hater of foreigners) but a passionate FAMILIAPHILE. Understanding that will take you a long way to understanding me, my attitudes and opinions, and perhaps those of a few other suspected "racists".
27 March (9:59):
[yakaboo], in response to your questions:
I've seen many very attractive Indian and Chinese women with whom, in fantasy in which I'm 20 years younger, I certainly could imagine falling in love and having children with. Also, I have very positive associations with Indian and Chinese history and culture, not that that plays much of a role when you are dealing with someone (anyone) at a personal level.
If people of different race or culture want to marry and have children then they should be free to do so, of course. However, no one, or their family, is an island, but lives in and depends on a society, some (perhaps many) members of which may not be happy (may feel deeply unhappy) to see their race and culture thus changed.
It depends on the degree of interracial marriage, of course - and this is of central importance. A little bit of mixing isn't going to make any discernable change to society at large, and the extent to which it is noticeable can be seen (certain by me it is) as the salt or spice in the soup. But when there is a large degree of mixing (not a pinch, but a cup full of salt), as there is now as a result of mass immigration (into our natively already overpopulated country), an entirely different situation arises. The ethnic and cultural composition and nature of our society is being very noticeably changed. This is a profound and very serious issue, which at the moment society, or rather, its ruling elites, refuse to face up to, and suppress by condemning any objections to it as "racist".
We are terrified of attributing any importance to race, even to the extent of denying its existence, because of the shock and horror we are still under from the consequences of the Nazi's insane racial doctrines. Attributing any social importance to race whatsoever, we fear, will immediately place us on the slippery slope to Auschwitz. So we deny its social importance, the natural role it has, not just for many black people, in contributing to our sense of identity and belonging (because of how it relates to our ancestors and history).
I can handle (even welcome) a small amount of ethnic and cultural mixing, but balk at the huge changes being brought about my mass immigration. Because I feel no sense of identity with or belonging to the multiracial/multicultural melting pot of a society that has thus been created. My identity is rooted (not entirely, but very largely) in my ethnicity, my ancestors and their history, which is European and "hideously white".
The problem with my attitude (the way I FEEL), unless I represent just a tiny minority, is that it undermines the power structures of the current socio-economic order, most especially of the nation state, which requires us all, irrespective of our origins, race, culture and history, to feel "British" and loyalty to the British state, its government and institutions. This is why the powers that be are so keen and determined to suppress it.
This is what I object to more than anything else: the fact that mass immigration and multi-racial/multicultural society is being forced on us. In no way is it a natural development that reason requires us to embrace. It is the result of economic forces (rooted in our primitive animal nature and behaviour) and the Darwinian struggle (also rooted in our animal nature) for advantage in the national and global socio-economic environment.
I think I'd better leave it there for the time being. I hope I've gone some way to answering your questions, which are extremely important and merit lots of attention. By all means, let us continue this debate, here or elsewhere.
27 March (3:03 PM)
[RobbieTheLion], I'm not as fatalistic as you, but put my faith in Providence, who I am hopeful wants the best for us. Mass society, when we all shared more-or-less the same ethnicity and culture, was difficult and unsatisfactory enough, but the multi-mass society we are now - insanely! - creating is going to be even more difficult and unsatisfactory. Who wants to live in a "melting pot", for heaven's sake? Some obviously do, and think they have some God given right (or moral duty) to impose it on everyone else!
It is high time we over came our fears of being branded "racists" (which we are not!) and stood up to this insanity.
But first, we need to recognise and understand what is behind it, as well as the insanity of our unsustainable economy and grossly materialistic lifestyles (and lifestyle aspirations) it engenders.
This, as I'm always trying to point out, is our animal nature and behaviour, which is continuing the Darwinian struggle for survival and advantage it evolved for in the natural environment (where we lived in extended family groups), in the artificial "socio-economic environment" (national and global) that has effectively replaced it.
Unfortunately, even our life and social scientists seem unable to recognise this profoundly important truth. I suppose, because, like everyone else, they too are totally immersed in (from birth), familiar with and dependent on the existing socio-economic order and environment.
[Teacup], Fears, rational or not, are real and best not dismissed as "idiotic" (or "racist"), but taken seriously.
My fear of the "melting pot" is that it will consume, if permitted to (driven by the forces I refer to above), not just the basis of my own ethnic and cultural identity, but all the ethnic and cultural diversity that humanity, despite the huge losses that have already occurred, is still so rich in.
28 March (9:05):
1. do you think cultures should or could stay separate for ever?
2. so it's OK for people from different cultures to partner up and breed – but not if it's too many. So if you were in charge, would you limit the number of inter-cultural partnerships, and make it illegal after that?
"Forever" is a very long time. What I would like to see is human diversity (cultural, ethnic AND economic) preserved and cultivated as much and for as long as possible. But this cannot (and should not) be forced on people (OK?). Those happy to see the diversity of their ethnic and cultural identities dissolve in a multiracial/multicultural melting pot should be free to participate - absolutely; but it should not be forced on those of us who do not want it (but prefer to preserve and cultivate our ethnic and cultural identities), as is happening now for the sake of a particular (Christian/leftwing universalist) ideology and of preserving the power structures of this nation state, which requires a shared (or at least, assumed) sense of "British identity".
Political and economic developments (driven by our animal nature and behaviour, which I go into elsewhere) have greatly reduced the cultural, linguistic and economic diversity of these islands (and elsewhere) over the centuries. Only now are some people beginning to appreciate what has been lost and are attempting to preserve at least some of it. Would it not be better to appreciate and preserve such things before we are in danger of losing them?
Generally, I do not find African women sexually attractive, but wishing to avoid giving possible offence, I didn't mention it. This highlights another bugbear I have with mulitculti society: you cannot be honest in public without fear of giving terrible offence to someone or other. Which is why we have been forced into an awful straight jacket of political correctness.
If you are still unsure of exactly "where I'm coming from", so am I. But participating in threads like this is helping me to find out.
[Teacup], Thanks for the compliment. Your analogy of immigrants giving flavour to the dish corresponds with my analogy (in a previous post, above) of the salt in the soup. The problem is that the spices have become major components of the meal itself - and it is not to everyone's taste. But any grimace on the face of those sitting at table is dismissed and condemned as an expression of xenophobia and racism.
The table is an analogy for the nation state (here, Britain). The powers that be want us all to remain at "their" table, of course, but what we need is a lot of smaller tables, where we can all have the meals and spices of our choice.
28 March (6:53 PM):
[yakaboo]: " . . . ultimately, our different cultures ARE going to enter the melting pot, in the same way that the normans, romans, saxons, angles etc all entered the British melting pot. So why try and be a canute? why not accept it?"
First of all, I do not accept it, because it is being forced on me, which I object to in principle. I will decide, if you don't mind, whether or not to accept the logic of the melting pot. I'm not stopping you or anyone else from doing so, but please, do not assume the right to force me to join you. I don't want to, for the reasons that I've laid out in previous posts (it is a threat to human diversity, and the forces driving it, far from being enlightened, are rooted in our primitive animal nature - and that is NOT a reference to your preference for African men, although, now I come to think about it . . . . ;-) ).
Now I'm trying to understand where YOU are coming from. My guess, based on what you have said, is that you are a white woman with a black (African or West Indian) partner, and probably with a mixed race child or children. That would explain why you are so keen on us all joining the melting pot that you (I'm assuming) have already committed yourself to.
If this is the case, it is in your children's and descendents interests to see the dominance (numerical, economic, political and cultural) of the native white population reduced and eventually replaced by that of mixed-race people. Understandably. I would not want to live in a society in which "my people" were not in the majority and dominant. That is a perfectly natural way to feel, so let's not pretend that such feelings do not exist, or that if they do they should be dismissed and condemned as wicked or "racist". They are not! We have to live with them.
You have your fears (for your children and descendents) and I have mine. Let us understand each others fears and learn to accommodate them. We do not have to be rivals, let alone enemies. As far as I'm concerned, the more diverse humanity is the better. But as "prime apes" (if you will excuse the pun), we are programmed to seek security (for ourselves and our progeny) in numbers and power. Hitler exemplified such behaviour, seeking to establish and expand German power over all other peoples: "Deutschland, Deutschland, über Alles!" was the Nazi national anthem.
We have to accept our animal nature, but we do not have to be dominated by it, as we are at the moment - although we deny it and use our prodigious animal intelligence to rationalize and justify our behaviour - not least, because the socio-economic order (and environment) we live in is rooted in it, having developed - naturally enough - to serve, exploit and depend on it.
I've got to leave it there, I'm afraid. Hopefully I'll get the chance to add some more tomorrow.
March 29, (c. 9:00 AM) My final Post (which missed the deadline of thread closure and thus didn't get posted)
[yakaboo], I think we are getting close to the root of our differences. You are obviously not an anthropologist. Neither am I, but I do take an anthropological view of things, which I'm always alluding to, because it is greatly (almost completely) neglected, but absolutely central to understanding human behaviour (including our own) and society, and how it has developed from the very beginnings up to the present day.
Most relevantly, free-market capitalism developed both to serve and exploit our animal nature and behaviour, which accounts for its inherent unfairness, inhumanity and non-sustainability, but because we are all so completely immersed in and dependent on it, although we may acknowledge it at a superficial level, we all but ignore the profound implications.
It IS natural, believe me, to identify with one's "own group", which originally (that for which this behaviour evolved) was our extended family. Nowadays, these feeling of group identity and belonging are projected onto other groups: our nation, football team, political party, etc., and also, though less well recognized, our ideology or world view. You obviously identify very strongly with the ideological group of "anti-racists", which is why you are always on the lookout for "racists", the "other group" (or enemy), which defines and gives cohesion to your own group, your own sense of identity and belonging.
The term, "my people", I adopted after hearing it so often used by (very respectable) black people, when referring to other black people and distinguishing themselves (their group) from white people (the "other group"), whom I belong to.
What you suspect of being "racist" about me, is my sense of identity with and belonging to my own (white) race, which you obviously do not share. This does not mean that I will take sides with a white racist - I certainly won't. But he is still one of "my people", just as Idi Amin and Robert Mugabe belong to Martin Luther King's "people".
But unlike me, and very many black people, you reject the very idea of "race" and its importance for many individual's sense of identity and belonging, and consider those who don't to be morally inferior (at least, if they are white). You want to enlighten me and help me attain your level of moral superiority, so that I can be a member of "your (ideological) group".
Can't you just accept (or at least tolerate) me as a member of a different ideological (world view) group?
It makes me a bit sad that you reject the bonds of common race (shared ancestors, history and culture) that bind us, but that is up to you.
March 29, (c. 12:00 AM) 14th Post (written despite knowing that deadline of thread closure had passed and, like the post before, would not actually be posted)
As chance would have it (and I'm not making this up, honestly), when walking yesterday (Wednesday) afternoon at Fairlop Waters, I got talking to someone who turned out to be of Turkish Cypriot origin, although born and brought up in Britain and entirely British. I mentioned this debate and asked him his opinion on Turkey joining the EU. Turks, he said, in general, have a very different mentality and values to Europeans and it would not be in Turkey's or Europe's real interests for them to join the EU. Thus confirming my own gut feelings.
My homepage: http://www.spaceship-earth.org