Monday, October 26, 2009

Bonnie Greer and the Indigenous English

I have decided to introduce an occasional guest writer to my blog, and begin today with Edward Beaman, shared surname but no relation. Edward and I have been in contact through the blogosphere for some time. He is extremely active, courageous and commonsensical on Twitter too.

So, I have pleasure in inviting you to read the following piece by Edward, my first ever guest blogger. If you wish to comment please do and Edward will respond
:

It is both fascinating and in some cases, very worrying, to note the changes that have taken place in Britain over the last few decades. In today's modern Britain, words such as 'ethnicity' and 'indigenous' have become taboo words which people associate with either the sterilised and scientifically neutral journals of human history or the bigotry and racism of fringe groups like the British National Party. In everyday life, the mere mention of these two words can send a shiver down the spine of the speaker and the listener.

That is of course unless one is piously explaining to or heckling anyone who dares deviate from the acccepted norms of this politically correct age. Then of course, these words must be treated as derogatory and dismissed as old fashioned, racist and even false. Take for instance, the African-American playwright Bonnie Greer who appeared on the BBC's flagship discussion programme Question Time last week. I was both bemused and shocked to say the least when she calmly stated "there are no indigenous British people". This was followed by claps from the Liberal-Left audience. Also on the panel was the leader of the BNP as well as three representatives of the three main political parties.

It's well known and practically taken for granted that the BNP's Nick Griffin is a genuine racist and bigot. That fact is undeniable and so I will leave rightful criticism of him for the rest of the blogosphere to complete. However, what Bonnie Greer said and in fact got away with, when thinking how little coverage her outrageous comments garnered from the media, is in my view an indictment on England's lost identity. Thankfully, many a commenter on online newspaper forums also picked up on these remarks which leads me to think a silent majority were also rather taken aback.

People might not think ethnicity matters and in many regards it does not. For example, no one should be treated any differently if they are black or white, different races should inter-marry and immigrants from Asia or Africa should be welcomed to these shores if they fit a job skill which is lacking. However, in other ways, ethnicity is an important distinction and no matter how much one denies it, we inherently judge people by the colour of their skin and their probable ethnic background. Is this bad? No, it's just natural and as long as it's not used to discriminate, abuse or alienate, it won't lead to negative repercussions.

That's where Bonnie Greer's comments come into play. Her derision and denial of an indigenous people of Britain was both discriminatory and alienating. What she fails to realise and has failed to study, is the myriad of research conducted by historians, forensic archaeologists, genetic anthropologists, genealogists, and linguists. These studies have shown, especially those of the last decade, that the overwhelming majority of English people today are descended from a group called 'the first people'.

Professor Bryan Sykes, Professor of Human Genetics at The University of Oxford has observed:

"We are an ancient people, and though the Isles have been the target of invasion and opposed settlement from abroad ever since Julius Caesar first stepped on to the shingle shores of Kent, these have barely scratched the topsoil of our deep-rooted ancestry. However we may feel about ourselves and about each other, we are genetically rooted in a Celtic past. The Irish, the Welsh and the Scots know this, but the English sometimes think otherwise. But, just a little way beneath the surface, the strands of ancestry weave us all together as the children of a common past." (1)

Isn't it sad that people can applaud a woman who denies the English their ethnicity and ancestry? Isn't it a further tragedy that it's left to the leader of an odious fascist party to be the only panellist to have stuck up for the indigenous English?

It's certainly not a problem our ancestors had in the 6th Century AD. In a letter to Augustine of Canterbury in the year 597 AD, King Ethelbert of Kent wrote:

"The words and promises you bring are fair enough, but because they are new to us and doubtful, I cannot consent to accept them and forsake those beliefs which I and the whole English race have held so long"

We see in this communication the recognition of both an English ethnicity and identity as well as a considerable history of such, preceding this letter. Bonnie Greer would do well to study the history of her adopted nation.

What I am basically saying, is that we shouldn't hide away from our history, our shared history that the majority of English people have in common. We should not baulk at the fact that yes, the indigenous people of Britain were and are, white. The words 'indigenous' and 'ethnicity' should not be seen as insults or concepts to deny, regardless of which race is being discussed. Common sense should not be thrown out of the window in the face of political correctness by claiming British citizens whose grandparents came from the Caribbean or Pakistan, are indigenously English or Scottish. Or worse still, a denial of the majority ethnicity, just so as to avoid any possible discrimination or alienation of ethnic minorities.

We must of course fight racism wherever it is found and condemn the likes of the British National Party whenever possible. Inter-marriage of races is and should be an accepted and celebrated fact of modern British life. That said, it's also important to note that people do identify more with people like themselves. Whether we or the political correct elites like it or not, the famous phrase "birds of a feather flock together" is true. We must also distinguish between race, nationality and culture, the latter of which deserves an essay of its own and is in my view, the most pressing concern facing modern Britain.

Edward Beaman

(1) 'Blood of the Isles', Bryan Sykes, Bantam Press, London, 2006

Edward's website is: Home Interior Design Themes

9 comments:

Greg L-W. said...

Yaa Boo,

Outrageous!!!

Nepotism!!!

Next you'l be paying your wife!!!

Pass the Green Ink - You're starting to act like a EUkip Politician!!!

Yours,
Indignant of Ebola

Paul said...

Racism begins with our families, parents, brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, grandparents, people we admire, respect and love.

However, as we grow and mature we come to the realization that what we were told by our family when we were children were slanted lies base on their prejudices. We realize that most people are like ourselves and not so different and want the same things, like a home, steady work, a Medicare plan and schools for our children (if you travel you will see this). We realize that most people are of good hearts and goodwill.

This reminds me of a parable from the good book where a Levite and Priest come upon a man who fell among thieves and they both individually passed by and didn’t stop to help him.

Finally a man of another race came by, he got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy and got down with the injured man, administered first aid, and helped the man in need.

Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the “I” into the “thou,” and to be concerned about his fellow man.

You see, the Levite and the Priest were afraid, they asked themselves, “If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?”

But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: “If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?”

That’s the question before us. The question is not, “If I stop to help our fellow man (immigrant) in need, what will happen to me?” The question is, “If I do not stop to help our fellow man, what will happen to him or her?” That’s the question.

This current climate of blaming others for our woes is not new. We have had this before and we have conquered it.

Remember “Evil flourishes when good men (and women) do nothing”. Raise your voices with those of us who believe we are equal and we can win this battle again.

Shailee said...

Bravo!! A commendable post.

Gregg's Blog said...

Nice one Greg! Honestly, no relation.

Gregg's Blog said...

I agree Shailee, so glad I invited Edward to do my first 'guest post'.

Edward Beaman said...

Absolutely Paul. Racism is abhorrent and all decent people should defend those who are unjustly targeted or abused.

Thank you Shailee! By the way Gregg, that is my Indian future wife. ;-)

Gregg's Blog said...

Congratulations, didn't know you were geting married.

Greg L-W. said...

Hi,

Edward The Unrelated! said:

Whether we or the political correct elites like it or not, the famous phrase "birds of a feather flock together" is true.

As a concept it was catastrophic for the Carrier Pigeon and did little for the Dodo. When the lemming tried to fly in flocks it did little for them also.

Racism is an attitude of mind usually most clearly adhered to by the self perceived victim.

The 'NOBLE Savage' wore the soubriquette with pride and dignity until it was abbreviated to 'savage'.

The Southern Swazi, Xhosa, Suttu and others were much enobled by the title Kaffir derived from the Arabic for a 'non believer' thus other than Muslim. It was when the Affrikaaner labeled the black collective as kaffers that it became resented.

What could a Frenchman do but call a man negre a mere translation of his obvious colour. Yet when Anglicised when speaking of the slavers of the Barbary Coast and the WHITE & slave trade as niggers it too was reveilled

'Is it 'cos I is white that I don't have a problem with colour'!!

I well remember the amusement amongst my loyal black staff - and what other term might I use since I had 15 different tribes I employed who lived on my land - when I denounced Afrikaaner obduracy as 'white kaffirs' - they are after all the only people I know who built a monument to kitchen Dutch and were named after their cattle!

Due to linguistic abuse it was pronounced that the black people of South Africa - who were in the main far from indiginous, the Zulu of today being in fact a Southern Swazi and the only indiginous peoples being the Boesmann - the people did not wish to be Kaffirs as this had been debased to kaffers, nigger never having been used due to the fortunate lack of French influence Black only became an issue as a result of outside pressures.

Such was the confusion that when Officially asked what they wished to be called as a collective they were a bit stumped but eventually came up with a word that had some commonality in their 28 basic languages.

The word chosen was the people a completely unsatisfactory solution that left the other 'people' called whites, Malays, coloureds, Indians and so on!!

OK so they wanted to be called umuntu : The People happily abbreviated first to 'people' 'muntu' and then to 'munt'.

No problem 'munts were perfectly happy with the title until some wag came up with the title for a black street sweeper, politician, black girl, the maid's boyfriend, doctor, as pavemunt, parliamunt, orimunt, hornimunt, medicamunt, etc.

Now in the rainbow country the courts can not use colour to define people so they are ALL greens - well dark greens, light greens and mid greens!

Ask a Mancunian such as NOT your relation Gregg, how many jokes about Scousers he knows; or an Irishman just how many jokes about Kerrymen he can tell.

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST

Greg L-W. said...

CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

I even hear the best joke the squaddies have heard is that we only went to Afghanistan to make sure Blair & Straw had enough young lads and lasses to be sure we won the Disabled Olympics in 2012!

Well did Tessa Jowell get put in charge of the idiotic Olympics because her husband reckoned he could get the Italians to pay for it and how dare we complain that a good Labour/Communist politician took his commission up front!

Where does natural rivalry end and racism begin - is it 'cos I is a honkes dat I is too sensative - should I be demanding an apology from Morrocco for the slaves their people seized from Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Monmouthshire and South Wales?

Perhaps we should send a bill to the people of 'colour' (the dark green ones) of the West Indies, Brazil and America for having bought their ancestors from the dark green inhabitants of Africa who had enslaved them and fattened them for transportation, often under the guidance of mid green traders - had we not bought them and brought them west they may well have been slaughtered, eaten or beheaded not to mention died of starvation or the many plagues of Africa.

Should we go to war with Italy to demand an apology for their invasion of Britain in 54BC or their trade in British slaves in Italy.

I lived in Karachi before Pakistan was created and called themselves Pakis - just as we were Brits but in Malaya & Indonesia I was a Johnny and in China a long nose whilst the Afrikaaners called the Brits vroten eier.

Surely the greatest insult you could give a jew would be to call them Israeli for fear they were mistaken for zionists as to which came first the yids who spoke yiddish or the speakers of yiddish who were yids.

Just how can one harm someone with a childish display of playground bullying which speaks volumes of the bully but gives the recipient the opportunity to take the high ground from the self styled bully who is the victim of his or her own stupidity.

I'm proud to be a Johnny, Brit, whitey, POME, honkey, limey to convert similar abbreviations to being belittling as with Pakis, negros, Kaffirs is the choice of the self selected victim.

'Is it 'cos I is a honkey'?

No doubt Edward The Unrelated could post some jokes about Dalit from his Indian fiance, not to mention about Pakis!

As for race - what caste is she, what sect is she, what religion is she, what region is she - who needs racism in a society so structured around heredity as in Rwanda where the Hutu enslaved the Tutsi and France reversed the order breeding immense hatred that left Millions of deaths from genocide at France's door - based not on race, nor colour but on tribe unlike Somalia where the Muslims slaughter the other tribes.

How can one leave it to the UN to sort out when they are merely 10 nations and 176 tribes! Nor France where the Enacs are so widely hated as the Parisenne favoured class and the Loire, Marselleis, Bretons, Normans all voted for the EU - NOT because they wanted to be vassals of the mallign organisation but because they no longer wanted to be vassals to Paris!

Perhaps it is called Racist as it is a race to the gutter by the self selected underdog!

Regards,
Greg L-W.