Saturday, 3 September 2011

British Nationalism - Part Two -

(The introduction to this article can be found here )
(The first part of the series can be found here )

I think it is reasonably fair to state that both today's liberal and conservative orthodoxies hold the opposite beliefs to the 'controversial' ones that we tend to hold as British nationalists. This is of course notoriously the case regarding the issue and role of race, and the impacts of multi racialism in society. 

I also believe I would be on safe ground to suggest that both the liberal and conservative viewpoint today is that all racial groups are equal in all regards of abilities and cultures, and that no matter how different people are, at the bottom of it all we are all basically alike and equally interchangeable. 

To push it to its extreme, they seem to believe that if you import people from Africa to replace people in Yorkshire, Yorkshire will not really become any different, other than the presence of new dark-skinned Yorkshiremen.

They might argue that no real loss has transpired - or if change has occurred, that it has "enhanced" and "enriched" the host community in some particular way which is beyond the capacity of the original inhabitants, to give it more "dynamism" and "vibrancy" (and other common buzz words which tend to get used but tend to evaporate on their meaning, when scrutinised).

What exactly is dynamism in this kind of context anyway? What is vibrancy? Do we need it? What value does it have? What does it cost? How is it measured? People are that used to hearing and saying it, they go along with it without ever really knowing what it is!