The Reform Thread

[Farmer Saint]

11 hours ago, LuckyNumber7 said:

It's mad that these comments are considered controversial. Braverman is right that just because you're born in England, it doesn't make you English. My mum was born in Zimbabwe to English parents, but she's not Zimbabwean! It's nonsense.

 

Sounds like you're half-Zimbabwean to me.

Maybe you should be deported - I hear they like whites out there.

[Weston Super Saint]

13 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Sounds like you're half-Zimbabwean to me.

Maybe you should be deported - I hear they like whites out there.

Assuming his father was born in England, it would be less than a quarter..

/MLGmode

[LuckyNumber7]

3 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

How do you become English ? What are the qualifications ?

One set of my wife's grandparents was from Wales, the other from Scotland, but she and her parents were born in England. What is her nationality ?

I would say they sound English, certainly British at least, but it's more nuanced than that. Each person will have their own idea of what being English means, but it's bizarre that people are criticising Braverman for her definition of her own identity. I don't think it's outrageous to say she's not English. Would you call Erling Haaland English?

1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

It's almost as if the need to pigeon-hole people into neatly defined nationalities is just a pointless absurdity that has been weaponised by bigoted, intolerant people to make a political point.

I have a cousin whose father is German. He was born in England but was moved to Germany by my aunt and her husband when he was three, where he grew up and went to school before returning to the UK to go to university. So does that make him...

a) English

b) German

c) Both

d) Neither

or e) IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER.

I guess national identity either matters to you or it doesn't. 

[badgerx16]

28 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Sounds like you're half-Zimbabwean to me.

Maybe you should be deported - I hear they like whites out there.

 

14 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Assuming his father was born in England, it would be less than a quarter..

/MLGmode

The One Drop Rule.

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, LuckyNumber7 said:

Each person will have their own idea of what being English means, but it's bizarre that people are criticising Braverman for her definition of her own identity. 

Braverman is entitled to define herself as she pleases, ( personally I would say she IS English, whilst she prefers "British" and also references her Asian heritage ). She is, however, wrong in denying Kemi Badenoch the right to declare her Engilshness if she so wishes.

[Osvaldorama]

12 hours ago, LuckyNumber7 said:

It's mad that these comments are considered controversial. Braverman is right that just because you're born in England, it doesn't make you English. My mum was born in Zimbabwe to English parents, but she's not Zimbabwean! It's nonsense.

 

Id go even further. 
 

To deny that someone’s ethnicity no longer exists is genocidal language. 

If an ethnicity that has existed for more than 1000 years isn’t a real ethnicity, then none are. 

Meaning the Holocaust was just a group of Germans attacking other Germans. 
 

I bet these same people defend the rights of Palestinians, or the rights of Maori’s to have a homeland in New Zealand. Yet English people are denied a homeland?

(The English have been in England longer than the Māoris have been in New Zealand btw) 

Edited 8 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[Osvaldorama]

1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

It's almost as if the need to pigeon-hole people into neatly defined nationalities is just a pointless absurdity that has been weaponised by bigoted, intolerant people to make a political point.

I have a cousin whose father is German. He was born in England but was moved to Germany by my aunt and her husband when he was three, where he grew up and went to school before returning to the UK to go to university. So does that make him...

a) English

b) German

c) Both

d) Neither

or e) IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER.

Neo-Marxist nonsense. 
 

Words & definitions matter. Categories matter. Otherwise discourse and democracy become impossible. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

3 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Words & definitions matter. Categories matter. Otherwise discourse and democracy become impossible. 

Of course they matter. How else are we druids going to identify all the people we shall be sweeping from our lands?! Angles, Saxons, Normans, Romans...feh!

[badgerx16]

13 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Id go even further. 
 

To deny that someone’s ethnicity no longer exists is genocidal language. 

If an ethnicity that has existed for more than 1000 years isn’t a real ethnicity, then none are. 

Meaning the Holocaust was just a group of Germans attacking other Germans. 
 

I bet these same people defend the rights of Palestinians, or the rights of Maori’s to have a homeland in New Zealand. Yet English people are denied a homeland?

(The English have been in England longer than the Māoris have been in New Zealand btw) 

Nobody is denying the English national identity, other than Suella Braverman implying that Kemi Badenoch can't be English.

My issue with this whole matter is that being English has become conflated with the flag shaggers - at times I feel embarassed and ashamed of my heritage due to those utter wankers having hijacked our national symbols. My wife has a hoodie with a Saxon emblem on it but she won't wear it any more because she doesn't want to risk being associated with them.

Edited 8 hours ago by badgerx16

[Osvaldorama]

44 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Nobody is denying the English national identity, other than Suella Braverman implying that Kemi Badenoch can't be English.

My issue with this whole matter is that being English has become conflated with the flag shaggers - at times I feel embarassed and ashamed of my heritage due to those utter wankers having hijacked our national symbols. My wife has a hoodie with a Saxon emblem on it but she won't wear it any more because she doesn't want to risk being associated with them.

That’s mostly down to propaganda though, in my view. 
 

People should be proud of their heritage. Being English is something to be immensely proud of, we have done a lot of good in the world. 

Everyone should be treated equally, regardless of ethnicity and background.  Doesn’t mean their background should be dismissed. 
 

Edit: also they are denying the English national identity. Or at least - denying us our right to be proud of it. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

People should be proud of their heritage. Being English is something to be immensely proud of, we have done a lot of good in the world. 

At what point do immigrant families become entitled to claim "Englishness" ?

Everyone should be treated equally, regardless of ethnicity and background.  Doesn’t mean their background should be dismissed. 

Agreed.

 

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Assuming his father was born in England, it would be less than a quarter..

/MLGmode

Meh, still a fucking muggle.

[Osvaldorama]

51 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Of course they matter. How else are we druids going to identify all the people we shall be sweeping from our lands?! Angles, Saxons, Normans, Romans...feh!

Funny how even when you’re joking you recognise that Angles/saxons/Normans/Romans existed as distinct ethnic groups. 
 

Yet suddenly the English are being told that they have none of their own.

[Sheaf Saint]

1 hour ago, Osvaldorama said:

People should be proud of their heritage. Being English is something to be immensely proud of, we have done a lot of good in the world. 

This is something I've heard many times over the years - that people should feel pride over the positive historical achievements of other people who just happened to be born within the same arbitrarily defined geographical area.

You are entitled to feel that pride, of course. But by the same token, do you also feel embarrassment and shame over the many atrocities that have been carried out in the name of the King/Queen in the past? 

[Osvaldorama]

6 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

This is something I've heard many times over the years - that people should feel pride over the positive historical achievements of other people who just happened to be born within the same arbitrarily defined geographical area.

You are entitled to feel that pride, of course. But by the same token, do you also feel embarrassment and shame over the many atrocities that have been carried out in the name of the King/Queen in the past? 

Of course. 
 

Every society (and person) does things that are both good and shameful. 
 

But in my opinion the good of the British empire FAR exceeds the negatives.

Yet we are told to focus almost exclusively on the negatives. I reject that completely.

Also… Your first paragraph is extremely dismissive of the weight of history. Countless people have fought and died for our society to be great. It’s not just a ‘random collection of people in a geographical area’

Edited 6 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, Osvaldorama said:

Funny how even when you’re joking you recognise that Angles/saxons/Normans/Romans existed as distinct ethnic groups. 
 

Yet suddenly the English are being told that they have none of their own.

My point was that putting limits on what counts as the proper ethnicity in a region, say 1000 years, is arbitrary.

From my druid perspective none of the later groups, calling themselves whatever they like, Romans, Saxons etc have any true claim to the land. That applies to later groups too, including the English. Yet all are perfectly entitled to be proud of their heritage, the land and whatever bits of their culture they like. 

But claiming that a historically tiny span, mixed in with invasions and massive migrations (which completely mix up cultural group names) is somehow the only bit that has a true claim is for the birds (who are happily migrating away, laughing down at such notions)

My Neolithic pal will be along shortly to laugh at my druidic claim to the land, despite my claim predating all of these other latecomers. 

[Osvaldorama]

13 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

My point was that putting limits on what counts as the proper ethnicity in a region, say 1000 years, is arbitrary.

From my druid perspective none of the later groups, calling themselves whatever they like, Romans, Saxons etc have any true claim to the land. That applies to later groups too, including the English. Yet all are perfectly entitled to be proud of their heritage, the land and whatever bits of their culture they like. 

But claiming that a historically tiny span, mixed in with invasions and massive migrations (which completely mix up cultural group names) is somehow the only bit that has a true claim is for the birds (who are happily migrating away, laughing down at such notions)

My Neolithic pal will be along shortly to laugh at my druidic claim to the land, despite my claim predating all of these other latecomers. 

Your point is kind of stupid and irrelevant, considering many other ethnic groups in the UK are more than willing to divide themselves into tribes:

 

 

Debating the minutiae of the Anglo-Saxon ethnic group seems pointless when other ethnic groups have proven they are willing to segregate and promote themselves over the rest.  
 

But even more than that, as I said previously, the idea that a group that has been defined since the 9th or 10th century, over 1000 years, is somehow “a tiny span” is completely preposterous. 
 

927AD is not a short time ago. LOL. 

Edited 6 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[Sheaf Saint]

18 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Of course. 
 

Every society (and person) does things that are both good and shameful. 
 

But in my opinion the good of the British empire FAR exceeds the negatives.

Yet we are told to focus almost exclusively on the negatives. I reject that completely.

Also… Your first paragraph is extremely dismissive of the weight of history. Countless people have fought and died for our society to be great. It’s not just a ‘random collection of people in a geographical area’

Fair comments. Often when this discussion has arisen in the past, my observation is that many of the people who express pride about the good bits of British history tend to wash their hands of the negative stuff and refute any connection. The way I see it, you can't have it both ways.

I'm not dismissing history though, by any means. I fully acknowledge the labours and the sacrifices of so many, including my own ancestors. My great grandfather was killed in the Battle of the Atlantic in 1942, and his brother was KIA somewhere in Belgium during WW1, when millions of young men were sent to their deaths in the name of 'national pride' (largely just to satisfy the egos of the ruling classes of the time). 

But I can't bring myself to feel pride about things that I have no control over or happened before I was born. Pride is something I reserve only for my own achievements or those of my daughter. 

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Your point is kind of stupid and irrelevant, considering many other ethnic groups in the UK are more than willing to divide themselves into tribes:

 

 

Debating the minutiae of the Anglo-Saxon ethnic group seems pointless when other ethnic groups have proven they are willing to segregate and promote themselves over the rest.  
 

But even more than that, as I said previously, the idea that a group that has been defined since the 9th or 10th century, over 1000 years, is somehow “a tiny span” is completely preposterous. 

Human habitation in Britain approx 900 000 years
Flag-shagging claims approx 1000 years

Conclusion: Flag-shaggers claim to shape destiny of where they inhabit, is based on a tiny period of occupation of it.

Thanks for the link to the cinema. Always good to be reminded about great cinema from across the world. And founded by someone born in London I see. Another success for the muti-cultural melting pot that is Britain!

[Osvaldorama]

8 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Human habitation in Britain approx 900 000 years
Flag-shagging claims approx 1000 years

Conclusion: Flag-shaggers claim to shape destiny of where they inhabit, is based on a tiny period of occupation of it.

Thanks for the link to the cinema. Always good to be reminded about great cinema from across the world. And founded by someone born in London I see. Another success for the muti-cultural melting pot that is Britain!

Do you deny the existence of the Māori, Afrikaners, Japanese, Chinese, etc etc

Or is it just the English that aren’t entitled to an ethnicity? 

[Osvaldorama]

14 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Fair comments. Often when this discussion has arisen in the past, my observation is that many of the people who express pride about the good bits of British history tend to wash their hands of the negative stuff and refute any connection. The way I see it, you can't have it both ways.

I'm not dismissing history though, by any means. I fully acknowledge the labours and the sacrifices of so many, including my own ancestors. My great grandfather was killed in the Battle of the Atlantic in 1942, and his brother was KIA somewhere in Belgium during WW1, when millions of young men were sent to their deaths in the name of 'national pride' (largely just to satisfy the egos of the ruling classes of the time). 

But I can't bring myself to feel pride about things that I have no control over or happened before I was born. Pride is something I reserve only for my own achievements or those of my daughter. 

 

 

If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.

 

A lack of national pride is why Britain is deteriorating into a shit hole in my opinion. 

[Sheaf Saint]

7 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything. 

And pride comes before a fall. 

[Sheaf Saint]

11 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

A lack of national pride is why Britain is deteriorating into a shit hole in my opinion. 

And yet Brexit happened because the cheerleaders for it successfully appealed to that sense of national pride among voters in 2016. I would argue that is a much greater factor in why Britain is where it is now. 

[Osvaldorama]

7 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

And yet Brexit happened because the cheerleaders for it successfully appealed to that sense of national pride among voters in 2016. I would argue that is a much greater factor in why Britain is where it is now. 

Not fucking Brexit again 😂😂 ffs 

[Farmer Saint]

"...fucking Beaker people, coming over here..."

[badgerx16]

In 927AD a diverse group of Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Vikings, and the descendants of Roman and Celtic peoples agreed to become a unified Kingdom and became the "English".

Since then, the "English" have absorbed Normans, French, Dutch, Germans, and many other diverse races and nationalities.

We are a mongrel nation, as most are. 

[badgerx16]

3 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

"...fucking Beaker people, coming over here..."

The best and brightest beaker people should have stayed in Iberia.......

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, Osvaldorama said:

Do you deny the existence of the Māori, Afrikaners, Japanese, Chinese, etc etc

Or is it just the English that aren’t entitled to an ethnicity? 

From my prior post:-

"groups, calling themselves whatever they like...including the English...are perfectly entitled to be proud of their heritage."

So, it's clearly a "no" for question 1, and for 2, the answer for 1 also includes the English.

What "English" actually means is up for debate.

I've got:-
Respect queuing.
Be tolerant.
Don't make a fuss. Unless any of the above 2 are being breached.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

18 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

"...fucking Beaker people, coming over here..."

Can't dig in the garden without coming across beakers. Not burial goods. Just excess stock, as beakers was the only thing they did. All that high status metalwork was just stuff they got the locals to do and claim credit for.

Does a beaker have entrails from which you can predict the future? I say to my folk.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

25 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In 927AD a diverse group of Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Vikings, and the descendants of Roman and Celtic peoples agreed to become a unified Kingdom and became the "English".

Since then, the "English" have absorbed Normans, French, Dutch, Germans, and many other diverse races and nationalities.

We are a mongrel nation, as most are. 

Explaining the efficient surrender to the taste of Edam cheese. 🙂

Edited 4 hours ago by Holmes_and_Watson

[Osvaldorama]

42 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In 927AD a diverse group of Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Vikings, and the descendants of Roman and Celtic peoples agreed to become a unified Kingdom and became the "English".

Since then, the "English" have absorbed Normans, French, Dutch, Germans, and many other diverse races and nationalities.

We are a mongrel nation, as most are. 

Stupid genocidal, Marxist propaganda. 
 

The English are an ethnic group and have been for 1000 years 

Edited 3 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[Osvaldorama]

29 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

From my prior post:-

"groups, calling themselves whatever they like...including the English...are perfectly entitled to be proud of their heritage."

So, it's clearly a "no" for question 1, and for 2, the answer for 1 also includes the English.

What "English" actually means is up for debate.

I've got:-
Respect queuing.
Be tolerant.
Don't make a fuss. Unless any of the above 2 are being breached.

Being “English” is not up for debate. 
 

Im not sure why you’re lying. 
 

English is an ethnicity and has been for 1000 years.  There is no debate about it. 

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, Osvaldorama said:

Stupid genocidal, Marxist propaganda. 
 

Or.... Accurate history.

Although I'm sure your Facebook pages are spot on.

[Weston Super Saint]

Just now, Osvaldorama said:

Being “English” is not up for debate. 
 

Im not sure why you’re lying. 
 

English is an ethnicity and has been for 1000 years.  There is no debate about it. 

But you are still unable to answer what makes someone "English".

[Osvaldorama]

34 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

But you are still unable to answer what makes someone "English".

The English are an ethnic group and nation native to England, defined historically by a shared ancestry originating from Anglo-Saxon and Celtic roots, as well as a common language, culture, and history

Funny how it’s always the ones that virtue signal the hardest about protecting other cultures, that are the first to denigrate their own 

Edited 3 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[badgerx16]

45 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Stupid genocidal, Marxist propaganda. 
 

The English are an ethnic group and have been for 1000 years 

So what were they before 927AD ?

Where did all the non Anglo-Saxons go in that year ?

 

[Farmer Saint]

11 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

The English are an ethnic group and nation native to England, defined historically by a shared ancestry originating from Anglo-Saxon and Celtic roots, as well as a common language, culture, and history

Funny how it’s always the ones that virtue signal the hardest about protecting other cultures, that are the first to denigrate their own 

That's because the English are a bunch of cunts.

[badgerx16]

46 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Being “English” is not up for debate. 
 

Im not sure why you’re lying. 
 

English is an ethnicity and has been for 1000 years.  There is no debate about it. 

"English" is an agglomeration of diverse groups over time, and as the identity has developed, so has the language, picking up more Germanic and French influence as the years went by.

As with my earlier post, were my wife's parents Scottish, Welsh, or English ? If they were Welsh and Scottish, what is my wife's ethnicity ?

[badgerx16]

16 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

The English are an ethnic group and nation native to England, defined historically by a shared ancestry originating from Anglo-Saxon and Celtic roots, as well as a common language, culture, and history

 

So anybody descended from the Norman invaders isn't English ?

[Mixedkebab]

4 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

That's because the English are a bunch of cunts.

Yes, they are humans, and most humans are cunty- you just don’t know any other cultures personally except your rural English cunty middle class pals.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

52 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Being “English” is not up for debate. 
 

Im not sure why you’re lying. 
 

English is an ethnicity and has been for 1000 years.  There is no debate about it. 

Being called a liar is a bit of a surprise. My last post answered your question on whether people can call themselves English.

I then lightheartedly wondered about what that actually means, as a number of posts have failed to actually define it.

For example, you've mentioned 1000 years a couple of times. Is your definition of English a family that traces themselves back that far? Regardless of their origins before that (could have been one of a number of invading countries.)

Is it from another point in time and if so, when? And why are any of these dates so specific, when in the land itself, people were coming and going all the time.

Is it values driven, and if so, what are those values?

[Osvaldorama]

15 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

That's because the English are a bunch of cunts.

So you’re racist? Nice 

 

 

[Osvaldorama]

3 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Being called a liar is a bit of a surprise. My last post answered your question on whether people can call themselves English.

I then lightheartedly wondered about what that actually means, as a number of posts have failed to actually define it.

For example, you've mentioned 1000 years a couple of times. Is your definition of English a family that traces themselves back that far? Regardless of their origins before that (could have been one of a number of invading countries.)

Is it from another point in time and if so, when? And why are any of these dates so specific, when in the land itself, people were coming and going all the time.

Is it values driven, and if so, what are those values?

you’re doing it again 

 

 

Go and look in a dictionary. 
 

English and Ethnicity are very very clearly defined words. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Osvaldorama

[badgerx16]

Just now, Osvaldorama said:

you’re doing it again 

 

If you are losing an argument, put up a Social Media post that supports your position and claim it as a definitive victory.

[Osvaldorama]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

If you are losing an argument, put up a Social Media post that supports your position and claim it as a definitive victory.

On what planet am I losing this argument 😂

You guys have raised nothing except insults and pretending not to know what ‘English’ means

[badgerx16]

15 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

On what planet am I losing this argument 😂

You guys have raised nothing except insults and pretending not to know what ‘English’ means

There is only one person on here struggling with the establishment and evolution of the English identity.

[Weston Super Saint]

52 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

The English are an ethnic group and nation native to England, defined historically by a shared ancestry originating from Anglo-Saxon and Celtic roots, as well as a common language, culture, and history

Funny how it’s always the ones that virtue signal the hardest about protecting other cultures, that are the first to denigrate their own 

So any family that has roots in England for over 500 years, but that may have come from Norway or Germany, cannot possibly be "English" as they will not share the Anglo Saxon roots.

I would suggest you take a look at your own family tree as this may well preclude you.

That would be awful wouldn't it?

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Osvaldorama said:

The English are an ethnic group and nation native to England, defined historically by a shared ancestry originating from Anglo-Saxon and Celtic roots, as well as a common language, culture, and history

 

Are Kernewek speakers not English ?

[Weston Super Saint]

9 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Are Kernewek speakers not English ?

Yes. As well as the Welsh and Irish speakers with their deep Celtic roots.

Luckily we have a clear definition for being "English" which categorically states that both the Welsh and Irish are "English".

I'm not sure Oswaldo has thought this through.

[Sheaf Saint]

52 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

 

One of the key prerequisites of good discourse is to ask probing questions to fully understand the arguments being put forward by the other side.

Repeatedly refusing to answer those questions and  posting idiotic memes tarring everyone who disagrees with you with the same brush and suggesting they are all just deliberately misunderstanding is infinitely more obstructive to that.