If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Oh, as an aside, a patriot can also be someone who will act in defense of what they see as intrusion by their government
We're not American, so nobody really. I never heard unBritish used as an insult and even unEnglish seems to be only used at people who cheat in sports.
I think Simon Schama summed it up best at the end of History of Britain when he talks about both Winston Churchill and George Orwell both being British icons and it being possible to be proud of both.
No-one defines Britishness. Its not like there's an officially approved check list - believes in fair play 'tick', likes cricket 'tick'*
Being British is something else - with lots of caveats you're British if you're born in the UK (and arguably Gibraltar, Isle of Man etc), born to British parents temporarily abroad or live here and decide to become naturalised.
Now you may not like the fact and call yourself a citizen of the world or People's Republic of Tooting Beck, but that's a different matter.
* though as possibly one of only two people from Northern Ireland or Scotland who likes cricket that may be even an English thing
What?
If no one defines it, then its meaningless. Where does that leave patriotism?
You were talking about power relations, and that isn't applicable really.
Patriotism is subjective. Therefore my definition will be different from yours.
Britishness is more to do with nationalism than patriotism.
You'll have to explain that.
Whose history?
So what is patriotism then?
I thought I already said what I thought patriotism was... :thumb:
I can define what Britishness means to me, others will have different definitions.
You're getting as bad as Klintock
Are you saying that a country and its history can be nebulous concepts? - if so well done. Its hardly an earth shattering discovery. There's an old saying 'nations don't invent nationalists, nationalists invent nations'.*
None of that invalidate the idea of patriotism, which to me is just basically the concept we are part of a wider community than just those people we personally know and feel some loyalty and affinity towards those people, based on common culture and a collective agreement about the past.
* may be quote, but can't be arsed to google it now.
Why, just because I think critically about issues of power, politics and culture?
I'm trying to find out what people mean by patriotism and how they come to decide what it means to be British and to love their country. It's becoming clear that most people haven't given it much thought.
No, because you ask questions and never put forward any answers.
Maybe you should pay attention then.
http://vbulletin.thesite.org/showpost.php?p=1905541&postcount=7
It fails to say why patriotism doesn't exist or shouldn't exist.
I don't understand what you mean. Why do you want me to say whether it does exist? Obviously it does. Should it exist? That's a meaningless question. Exist in what context?
I could say "read the thread", but I'll try and put this as simply as possible for you.
We all have the same history, just different perspectives on the same moments in time.
For example, some people will see the slave trade as a bad thing and something to be ashamed of, others see it as what built our country and therefore something to be proud of. The fact that we were one of the first to abolish it is seen by some as a sign of our national maturity and therefore something to be proud of, while others see it as a sign of weakness.
Everyone therefore, on the same issue, is likely to either have a sense of pride in what our countrymen did or a sense of same.
It really isn't rocket science Blagsta.
What we feel patriotic about might differ but we are likely to have some sense of it in many issues.
To merely say "it's about shared history" is far far too simple - whose history, constructed by who, in what interests?