Mec Vannin Make Believe

[localyokel]

I don't have rose tinted glasses - but I'm a realist that spends a good deal of time in the UK and most people I speak to when I'm there have had enough. You have record numbers of people leaving the UK, and record immigration from other countries replacing the brits that go. Its almost a cultural hand over because those that are leaving don't really care about what is going to happen to what they leave behind - they just want to go. They believe that there is that little left that its a wasted effort to salvage what there is. Some of the reasons they are leaving might be subliminal racism but on balance from those I've spoken to its more about crap services, high taxes, crap schooling, violence, the drunken fighting culture, knife crime etc.

 

The Isle of Man to many new residents is still viewed as being what the UK once was - less aggressive, more tolerant, more open, less hassle. We may not think that its that better over here but the perception from others is that it is. The only people we need to be careful of - and I've heard it on a few occasions - are those that chose to move here because its less ethnically diverse. I've heard some horrible statements made by some of the older new residents that its a little bit more ... well ... white over here which is pretty deplorable. They think that because we are white that we are just british people like them. There's no acceptance of the cultural differences over the centuries and because we don't stick out as different they just assume were the same.

 

As for the Scots and the Welsh - I'm not holding them up as perfect examples. Just better examples than most of the rest of UK.

[Saltire]

As for the Scots and the Welsh - I'm not holding them up as perfect examples. Just better examples than most of the rest of UK.

 

Unfortunately in Scotland, sectarianism between Celtic and Rangers fans can be far worse than any racism. Attempts have been more successful at making racism unacceptable then sectarianism at the moment. (Although I am not saying that racism doesn't exist at all).

 

Certainly we don't have the BNP up here. They were hounded out of Glasgow a couple of years ago when they came and tried to recruit for support after a white teenager was murdered by an asian. What they failed to understand was this area of Glasgow had a mix of white and asian communities that had existed for many years! Brutal as this killing was it was deemed not to be race related but an unprovoked attack by someone that had already a long criminal record, and was well known in the area as being undesirable. And that was the opinion of both communities.

[VinnieK]

I'm a realist that spends a good deal of time in the UK and most people I speak to when I'm there have had enough. You have record numbers of people leaving the UK, and record immigration from other countries replacing the brits that go. Its almost a cultural hand over

 

But how much of that is perception, and how much reality? Take the Scots as an example: A recent survey suggested that a lot of Scots fear their culture is under siege from immigration, to the point where they're starting to worry about the potential for race riots, but the actual number of immigrants in Scotland is significantly low, lower than many countries in Europe. The same is true of England. Over 90% of residents in England are white, the vast majority of those British, and most ethnic minorities are concentrated in specific towns and cities (such as London, which has always had a significant non British population), and indeed specific areas of those towns and cities. I've been here for nine years now, from large cities with a significant minority population such as Bristol, to smaller, more homogenous ones such as York and Norwich, and I've yet to witness the supposed erosion of British culture or its handover. Certainly immigrant communities have their own identity, but I don't see it as having developed at the expense of the domestic culture.

 

The Isle of Man to many new residents is still viewed as being what the UK once was - less aggressive, more tolerant, more open, less hassle. We may not think that its that better over here but the perception from others is that it is. The only people we need to be careful of - and I've heard it on a few occasions - are those that chose to move here because its less ethnically diverse. I've heard some horrible statements made by some of the older new residents that its a little bit more ... well ... white over here which is pretty deplorable. They think that because we are white that we are just british people like them. There's no acceptance of the cultural differences over the centuries and because we don't stick out as different they just assume were the same.

 

You talk entirely about "them" and "their" views. What about good old fashioned Manx racism? Doesn't it exist? Having heard some of the comments about Polish and indeed black residents I can assure you that it does. Certainly we should reject racism from anyone, however it is expressed, but I'm worried that focusing our attention on the racism of incoming residents is not only itself a form of prejudice (not that I deny that some are indeed racist), but also neglects our own sometimes problematic attitudes to race.

 

As for the Scots and the Welsh - I'm not holding them up as perfect examples. Just better examples than most of the rest of UK.

 

I'd disagree. The Scots, Welsh and Irish all see considerably less immigration and accept less candidates for Asylum than does England, yet their problems with racism are at least significant and increasing. In a recent survey in Scotland 29% of respondents reported that there was "sometimes good reason" to hold prejudiced views. In other words, nearly a third believe that racism in certain cases is justified, whilst racist attacks and incidents have been rising, by 20% over a five year period in the case of Strathclyde police. Now I'm certainly not saying that Scotland is an inherently racist or intolerant place (because it's not), but I don't believe it's accurate to say that the Scots or Irish necessarly have more tolerant societies (especially since they haven't been "tested" by immigration levels in the same way England has).

[localyokel]

I'd disagree. The Scots, Welsh and Irish all see considerably less immigration and accept less candidates for Asylum than does England, yet their problems with racism are at least significant and increasing.

 

I think the base line issue on this is easy.

 

Nations that have historically had to emigrate to perpetuate themselves (I'm talking here about the Manx in the C18th and C19th expatriating to the US, Australia, South Africa because they had no economy to support themselves, or the Scots or the Irish for exactly the same historical reasons) tend to be less exposed to institutionalised racism because their history has meant that they or their ancestors have had to successfully integrate into new cultures and they are perhaps more acute to the sensibilities of being an outsider and therefore more tolerant. The English / British norm through the Empire has been to colonise and convert other races through force or by influence. Racism is better bred in such societies as the historical precedent for the British has been about trying to force other cultures to comply with what is seen as British behaviour rather than tolerating other cultures they have taken over. The flag of St George itself is a crusader flag.

 

That in essence is what a lot of these comments about being subjegated by our British masters are saying. Its not about fishing rights, or economic zones, for most posters its actually about the imposition of a culture and way of life that does not fully recognise the history of the Island and its people. The history between the UK and the IOM has not been that brilliant or beneficial, but I think the balance now is ok, and that the economic ties have made the Island a huge success that we have benefitted from enormously, but I would say that the nasty side of some of what is culturally happening in the UK is starting to creep in here.

 

You also mentioned:-

 

In a recent survey in Scotland 29% of respondents reported that there was "sometimes good reason" to hold prejudiced views. In other words, nearly a third believe that racism in certain cases is justified, whilst racist attacks and incidents have been rising, by 20% over a five year period in the case of Strathclyde police

 

That's probably more directed at the British than the Asians or Eastern Europeans.

 

The fact is that the Scots, Welsh, and Irish, (Manx?) probably for good historical reasons - linked to the reasons for centuries old patterns in enforced economic migration I mentioned before - despise the british more than the other nationalities now moving to their countries. But racism is racism, no matter what group its targetted at.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

At the same time its great to see how devolution has helped the Scots and the Welsh maintain a better national identity, and its nice to see the efforts that have been made over here to try to re-invigorate the language and cultural side. Its probably not enough but with us Manxies in the certain minority what can we expect (well over 50% of the kids in schooling here must be from UK parents so they are not going to be interested).

 

Maybe the Scots and Welsh have a strong NATIONAL identity but it is questionable whether they have a better one. I don't see nationalism as being as good at all. A lot of Welsh and Scottish rant on about their un-Englishness, the battle they have fought with the english, they strong celtic identity which is supposedly still intact, and they rant about their great it is to be Scottish or Welsh just for the sake of their anti-englishness. I don't see that sort of nationalism as being better than that of the English. English nationalists do not come across as having a form of inferiority complex as some of those from the celtic nations and I would suppose that much of this is because that the english have no need to continually re-produce ideas of their nationality. I think devolution has its benefits in de-centralising power across the UK but in the long term I would be interested to see how relevant nationalism will be in the future. I just think there are matters of far, far more importance than national identity. It is ridiculous how people frame their country's supposed cultural decline on the cultural influences of another country rather than look at the damage that state and especially corporate power have on their culture.

 

The Isle of Man to many new residents is still viewed as being what the UK once was - less aggressive, more tolerant, more open, less hassle. We may not think that its that better over here but the perception from others is that it is. The only people we need to be careful of - and I've heard it on a few occasions - are those that chose to move here because its less ethnically diverse. I've heard some horrible statements made by some of the older new residents that its a little bit more ... well ... white over here which is pretty deplorable. They think that because we are white that we are just british people like them. There's no acceptance of the cultural differences over the centuries and because we don't stick out as different they just assume were the same.

 

As for the Scots and the Welsh - I'm not holding them up as perfect examples. Just better examples than most of the rest of UK.

 

Then those heading over will get a surprise. Wages are better, standards of living are better, there is less crime but LESS TOLERANT. I don't think so. England has a lot of problems and I can't say that I want to stay there all my life but it is certainly more tolerant in attitudes than the Isle of Man is. Obviously there are areas where race crime occurs and where attitudes are quite backward but if you are talking about the UK cities then the UK is far more tolerant.

If there is less racism on the Island it is because there are far less people from ethnic minorities and if it appears there is less homophobia it is because the attitudes are more conformist and people are far more scare of 'coming out of the closet'. From my experience the Island in general is very conformist in its culture and the political attitudes are less liberal than in the UK. Which is why I think the Island benefits greatly from its links with the UK.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Nations that have historically had to emigrate to perpetuate themselves (I'm talking here about the Manx in the C18th and C19th expatriating to the US, Australia, South Africa because they had no economy to support themselves, or the Scots or the Irish for exactly the same historical reasons) tend to be less exposed to institutionalised racism because their history has meant that they or their ancestors have had to successfully integrate into new cultures and they are perhaps more acute to the sensibilities of being an outsider and therefore more tolerant. The English / British norm through the Empire has been to colonise and convert other races through force or by influence. Racism is better bred in such societies as the historical precedent has not been about asymilating into new cultures but rather trying to force other cultures to comply with what is seen as "British" behaviour rather than tolerate other cultures.

 

That in essence is what a lot of these comments about being subjegated by our British masters are saying. Its not about fishing rights, or economic zones, from most posters its actually about the imposition of a culture and way of life that does not fully recognise the history of the Island and its people. I think the balance now is ok, and that the economic ties have made the Island a huge success that we have benefitted from, but I would say that the nasty side of some of what is happening in the UK is starting to creep in here.

 

This MIGHT be possible but I think it highly unlikely. Simply because the Irish, Scottish, or Manx emigrated centuries ago does not mean they are less racist than the British today. I would question how the experiences of the Irish emigres in America have directly had an impact on the supposedly more tolerant Irish people today. Most Irish never returned so how would they have shared their 'outsider' sensibilities with rest of Ireland. Besides whereas the Irish did receive a great deal of discrimination in America, for example during the Civil War, the Scottish in New Zealand did not.

Even if racism was better bred in regions of the empire, how does relate to the English societies of today? Wheres the link?

The British Empire was not just an English empire, what of the role of the Scottish and Irish.

From my understanding of history the British were MAINLY not very interested in altering the customs or traditions of the Empires peoples, except where they contradicited the moral teachings of christianity.

 

When you refer to imposition of a culture and way of life by the English I have to question exactly what you mean. What way of life? And was it the English that orchestrated these changes? And what is the nastiness that is creeping in from the UK?

[Freggyragh]

Saltire - at least half of the sectarianism in the West of Scotland is caused by pro-British unionists who hate the idea of Scottish independence almost as much as they hate Irish independence.

 

La Dolce Vita - from my understanding of history the British state did its very best to enforce the English Language upon all the peoples of the empire. It was, I'll agree less committed in its efforts to export religion - except where it came up against Catholicism.

 

The argument seems to have degenerated into a slanging match - and I don't want to add to it. The problem is that we live in the age of globalization - we all want to reap the benefits without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and at the same time we are emerging from a long period of imperial domination. English culture has unfortunately been subsumed by globalization. I'm not arguing that the Manx are any better or worse than anyone else - I just believe in preserving cultural diversity in the face of globalization and mass immigration. I welcome that immigration and believe in the right of people to freedom of movement. I think it would be a terrible loss for the world if we ditch our cultural difference. There is no reason why immigrants cannot be part of, and enrich, that identity. What annoys me are the Ein Volk type English nationalists, and the Manx who have been brainwashed to think England is the be all and end all.

 

A lot of the drive behind the current Manx cultural and economic revival comes from English, and other, immigrants - it is often immigrants that see the value of, and are most passionate and protective about the culture they have moved to - even if it is Norfolk I also think we are too narrow in our acceptance of who is Manx. We all are if here is home. Unfortunately it is protocol 3 that says I am Manx but someone with a non-Manx grandparent isn't - as far as I'm concerned if your loyalties are here, you are Manx.

 

Getting back to Skeddan's posts however, as our largest, most powerful neighbour, with a known propensity for colinization, anti-Celticism, and lack of interest in our interests, I think we should indeed be vigilant in our dealings with the UK - when they start building all those new nuclear reactors and are looking for somewhere to dump the waste they won't care less what we think of them or where we were born.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Saltire - at least half of the sectarianism in the West of Scotland is caused by pro-British unionists who hate the idea of Scottish independence almost as much as they hate Irish independence.

 

La Dolce Vita - from my understanding of history the British state did its very best to enforce the English Language upon all the peoples of the empire. It was, I'll agree less committed in its efforts to export religion - except where it came up against Catholicism.

 

The argument seems to have degenerated into a slanging match - and I don't want to add to it. The problem is that we live in the age of globalization - we all want to reap the benefits without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and at the same time we are emerging from a long period of imperial domination. English culture has unfortunately been subsumed by globalization. I'm not arguing that the Manx are any better or worse than anyone else - I just believe in preserving cultural diversity in the face of globalization and mass immigration. I welcome that immigration and believe in the right of people to freedom of movement. I think it would be a terrible loss for the world if we ditch our cultural difference. There is no reason why immigrants cannot be part of, and enrich, that identity. What annoys me are the Ein Volk type English nationalists, and the Manx who have been brainwashed to think England is the be all and end all.

 

A lot of the drive behind the current Manx cultural and economic revival comes from English, and other, immigrants - it is often immigrants that see the value of, and are most passionate and protective about the culture they have moved to - even if it is Norfolk I also think we are too narrow in our acceptance of who is Manx. We all are if here is home. Unfortunately it is protocol 3 that says I am Manx but someone with a non-Manx grandparent isn't - as far as I'm concerned if your loyalties are here, you are Manx.

 

Getting back to Skeddan's posts however, as our largest, most powerful neighbour, with a known propensity for colinization, anti-Celticism, and lack of interest in our interests, I think we should indeed be vigilant in our dealings with the UK - when they start building all those new nuclear reactors and are looking for somewhere to dump the waste they won't care less what we think of them or where we were born.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Saltire - at least half of the sectarianism in the West of Scotland is caused by pro-British unionists who hate the idea of Scottish independence almost as much as they hate Irish independence.

 

La Dolce Vita - from my understanding of history the British state did its very best to enforce the English Language upon all the peoples of the empire. It was, I'll agree less committed in its efforts to export religion - except where it came up against Catholicism.

 

The argument seems to have degenerated into a slanging match - and I don't want to add to it. The problem is that we live in the age of globalization - we all want to reap the benefits without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and at the same time we are emerging from a long period of imperial domination. English culture has unfortunately been subsumed by globalization. I'm not arguing that the Manx are any better or worse than anyone else - I just believe in preserving cultural diversity in the face of globalization and mass immigration. I welcome that immigration and believe in the right of people to freedom of movement. I think it would be a terrible loss for the world if we ditch our cultural difference. There is no reason why immigrants cannot be part of, and enrich, that identity. What annoys me are the Ein Volk type English nationalists, and the Manx who have been brainwashed to think England is the be all and end all.

 

A lot of the drive behind the current Manx cultural and economic revival comes from English, and other, immigrants - it is often immigrants that see the value of, and are most passionate and protective about the culture they have moved to - even if it is Norfolk I also think we are too narrow in our acceptance of who is Manx. We all are if here is home. Unfortunately it is protocol 3 that says I am Manx but someone with a non-Manx grandparent isn't - as far as I'm concerned if your loyalties are here, you are Manx.

 

Getting back to Skeddan's posts however, as our largest, most powerful neighbour, with a known propensity for colinization, anti-Celticism, and lack of interest in our interests, I think we should indeed be vigilant in our dealings with the UK - when they start building all those new nuclear reactors and are looking for somewhere to dump the waste they won't care less what we think of them or where we were born.

 

I don't think this has degenerated into a slanging match. I think this is a very argument for and against the aspects of nationalism.

Well the English did not always enforce the language on other and certainly on respect of the Isle of Man it was the few upper class gentleman Manx who disgarded the Manx language as it was not useful in their dealings with the UK.

 

If yopu believe in freedom of movement you cannot also object to mass immigration because the capitalist system that continues to exploit the poorer workers of the world is the reason why people are heading to the UK and the Isle of Man.

 

I would drop the term anti-celticism because there is little about Scotland, Ireland, Wales, or the Isle of Man that it celtic.

 

You talk about globalisation yet it seems your emphasis is solely about the relationship between England and the Isle of Man.

I think the people of the Island and outside the Island should be more vigilant about the increasing power of corporate bodies and the State in their lives and how that affects their them rather than the influence of the English culture on the Isle of Man. That is what I am getting at. The increasing power of corporate bodies is having and will potentially have far more of an adverse impact on our lives and those of the peoples of the world.

 

I know few people who think England is the be all and end all but I am interested in what you mean by people displaying their loyalties.

[VinnieK]

A lot of the drive behind the current Manx cultural and economic revival comes from English, and other, immigrants - it is often immigrants that see the value of, and are most passionate and protective about the culture they have moved to - even if it is Norfolk

 

Ok, I'll bite. What, am I supposed to feel ashamed of where I live now?

 

I also think we are too narrow in our acceptance of who is Manx. We all are if here is home. Unfortunately it is protocol 3 that says I am Manx but someone with a non-Manx grandparent isn't - as far as I'm concerned if your loyalties are here, you are Manx.

 

But who determines what qualifies as loyalty to the Isle of Man? National loyalty is a vague and largely meaningless term that is open to abuse by anyone who wants to use it to justify their own opinions and invalidate criticism of themselves without having to argue with it. A person who believes that their ideal of Manx culture at all costs might see themselves as loyal, yet in actuality their belief may promote nothing but cultural stagnation and artificiality. Similarly someone who believes that the Island should move closer to England, Ireland, Scotland, Belarus, the moon, or where ever might say that they are being loyal in trying to preserve the Island's prosperity by aligning it with a larger state, but this may turn out to be to the economic and cultural detriment to the Island. Loyalty is an empty term that both ignores practicalities and relies on an authoritative definition of what constitutes an act of loyalty or a loyal thought, and I don't believe there's anyone who can offer such a definition.

 

 

English culture has unfortunately been subsumed by globalization. I'm not arguing that the Manx are any better or worse than anyone else - I just believe in preserving cultural diversity in the face of globalization and mass immigration

 

"Subsumed by globalization" is an attractive and easy phrase to use, full of fin de siecle glamour, but I don't think it really carries as much meaning as its dramatic phrasing suggests. If culture changes it is usually because people accept that change, as opposed to being trampled under the mysterious and powerful force of globalisation. They take new influences and willingly adopt and adapt them into their own culture, and I'm not yet convinced that anyone's offered a convincing argument as to why we should try to stop them and limit those influences. Also, immigration is also only one agent of cultural change (and since immigrants are usually met with a certain amount of resistance from their host nation, not even the biggest one). The most powerful forms of cultural transmission are (and always have been) trade, entertainment and news media, and travel abroad, and it's difficult to see how it's possible to effectively limit these influences.

 

France provides a case in point - ever concerned about their culture and doggedly convinced as to its uniqueness and value the French government I believe places quotas on popular entertainment media to ensure that the public are exposed to French culture and to limit the influence of external ones, and have institutionalized the preservation of their language. Yet French tastes are still changing and as accepting of the hollywood blockbuster and fast food as ever before. Certainly there's nothing wrong with attempts to preserve a nation's culture, but at the end of the day if people like another country's movies or slang, or want the same consumer items as citizens of another nation, there's very little anyone can do about it.

[Skeddan]

Loyalty is an empty term that both ignores practicalities and relies on an authoritative definition of what constitutes an act of loyalty or a loyal thought, and I don't believe there's anyone who can offer such a definition.

 

I don't know why anyone ought to think that 'loyalty' relies on an authoritative definition of what constitutes an act of loyalty or a loyal thought. Neither would I think that the notion of a 'game' relies on an authoritative definition of a 'game'.

 

I also wouldn't rush to assume that 'loyalties' in the sense that Freggyragh used it means 'national loyalty' in a flag-waving anthem-singing jingoistic manner. Dylan Thomas certainly was not disdainful of Wales and all aspects of Welsh culture and heritage, nor did he not value the Welsh language, yet he had little time for Welsh nationalism - it was said he had three words to say about it, and two of those were 'Welsh' and 'Nationalism'. He may have had a love-hate relationship with Wales, but that arises from a certain kind of attachment and belonging to the place. That sense of attachment is not simply due to where one was born, how many generations of your family have lived there, how long you've lived there, or how 'pure' your native blood is or other extrinsic factors (many first generation settlers in America with only a couple of words of English had a much greater sense of attachment to the new country than to their old, and for example, in NZ some 4th generation 'old timers' still count themselves more as English expats rather than Kiwi, and many leading Maori campaigners have more European blood than Maori). That sense of attachment is, among other things, bound up with the history, culture, values, ideals, and 'personality' of a place that a person sees in it, finds significant and aligns themselves with. Different things will be important to different people, and there need not even be agreement on these (to different people 'The American Dream' may for example have represented an ideal to do with egalitarianism and rejection of class privilege, to others it may have been an economic ideology). I’d suggest that maybe such attachments of what people feel is important to them when taken together collectively and ‘as a whole’ gives a sense of 'national identity' and that, in turn, also lends something to the values, attitudes beliefs and aspirations people might have.

 

I don't know any Kiwis who'd call themselves 'nationalists', but as might be gathered from New Zealand tourism advertising there is a sense of 'what makes NZ special' - one that is felt by most Kiwis and which is not jingoistic or nationalistic, nor is it proud or arrogant, but rather reminds one of what there is to be cherished, strengthens the sense of belonging, and makes one feel blessed.

 

It's easy to be cynical about such attitudes, as I was before living in NZ, but consider the nihilism, inner anger, and alienation of the kind seen in Trainspotting which goes with having only a fourth rate junk history and a sham-heritage of inferiority and subservience. I think one has to admire the Manks for not having let this get to them as it might - perhaps partially through adopting a kind of attitude of detachment or apathy and not giving a toss about that junk history.

 

who determines what qualifies as loyalty to the Isle of Man?

 

The more interesting questions are to do with what is presented as what is special and of value about IoM, who determines this, how is this slanted, whether this reflects what people might truly value about IoM, and what it is that might instead be valued and held important. Various posts, such as by Albert Tatlock, and the current direction of the discussion with localyokel, La_Dolce_Vita, Freggyragh and others present highly relevant views, insights and concerns. These in themselves should show such issues cannot simply be brushed aside in a disdainful dismissal that such concerns are nothing but misguided nationalistic loyalism. I think it can also be gathered that neither BNP style nationalists, Taliban style Manx fundamentalists, nor even Mec Vannin represent or reflect the views of the majority of those whose loyalties are to IoM - that is those who care about IoM and count it as home. Personally I’m interested in hearing more of those views expressed and discussed.

[VinnieK]

Loyalty is an empty term that both ignores practicalities and relies on an authoritative definition of what constitutes an act of loyalty or a loyal thought, and I don't believe there's anyone who can offer such a definition.

 

I don't know why anyone ought to think that 'loyalty' relies on an authoritative definition of what constitutes an act of loyalty or a loyal thought. Neither would I think that the notion of a 'game' relies on an authoritative definition of a 'game'.

 

I also wouldn't rush to assume that 'loyalties' in the sense that Freggyragh used it means 'national loyalty' in a flag-waving anthem-singing jingoistic manner.

 

It's because Freggyragh states that who is or isn't considered Manx should be determined according to their demonstrable loyalty to the Island - this is surely an important enough matter (since it implies the effective cultural "disownership" of a person seen to be on the wrong side of the loyalty fence) to require some kind of definite criteria, which has to be determined by someone. Yes cases such as people who live on the Island simply for the benefits of taxation can easily be identified as not demonstrating any great attachment to the Island, but neither, in my opinion, are those who invent an arbitrary and largely ahistorical list of characteristics and beliefs and elevate it to the position of an ideal vision of Manxness.

 

...These in themselves should show such issues cannot simply be brushed aside in a disdainful dismissal that such concerns are nothing but misguided nationalistic loyalism.

 

Which I try not to do, instead reasoning that a lot of concerns, whilst sincerely held, are sometimes impractical, based on an arbitrary concept of Manx identity, or centre upon a distorted history, and are hence invalid. Often these flaws are a consequence of uncritical nationalist sentiment , which also needs to be addressed, but I have also attempted to confront the arguments themselves.

[Irwezsh]

Well firstly I'll say I've only skimmed the topic so sorry if I say somit' stupid.

 

What I think we first need to accept is that just because someone is born elsewhere or on the island to 'international' parents, they still can be Manx... As werid as it sounds to you maybe, but aslong as you take intrest in where you live and get the best from it you can call your self what you want. Take the other side of the coin, you can be Manx as they come but if you don't care for the Island, I'm not going to consider you really Manx. It apllies to any country in the world.

 

I also support Manx inderpendence maybe for the wrong reasons but I support it all the same. I really belive the island's government and civil service really need to step up there game stop taking English laws messing them up and applying them to our Island. Things that work in a country of 50 million (or whatever it is?) arn't always going to work in a country of 80 thousand.

 

I could write more but I'm tired... Just thought I would pop in with a quick point of view. Might add more tommorow when I'm more alert.

[staaue]

My English partner is more Manks than some members of my Manks family; it is definitely to do with where your heart is. I have no problems with someone turning up on our shores and wanting to fit in to our culture. This is something that can only be good for our society; as long as they respect our homeland.

 

 

La Dolce Vita...

I would like to add that children were indeed forced to drop their native language by the schools and education system; and they were also forced via their family for financial reasons as in the 18th Century. If you were a Manks native speaker and you had to pay the headmaster at your child's school for your child's English lessons until they were deemed fluent enough. wouldn't you encourage your child to get good fast!!!!!!!! I also like the 20th Century education tactic that had evolved on to a level where English education was enforced on the Isle of Man; in the context of the English system was to decide the topics of education on the island. This is still in practice today I believe, with the start of the day praying and singing. I'm sure you would find lots of references on Frances' website.

 

Staaue.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

My English partner is more Manks than some members of my Manks family; it is definitely to do with where your heart is. I have no problems with someone turning up on our shores and wanting to fit in to our culture. This is something that can only be good for our society; as long as they respect our homeland.

 

I don't know about that. I think it is a shame when you have groups in society who have little contact with other but the reasons behind are generally down to discrimination on both sides.

 

I can understand from the point of view of those who desire that foreigners take on the societal norms and values that it is good thing.

But I am inclined to think that integration is a bad process as the pressures that are placed on people to integrate are the result of prejudice and discrimination in society. Integration is something that a lot of emigrants to the UK have wanted and desired for themselves and their children because they understand well enough that the ONLY way to be tolerated in society is to assume the British culture.

Integration almost always involve the assumption of another groups culture for the loss of one's own. I don't believe that people should be pressured to do this. Certainly in many respects there is a lot about the Manx culture that is undesirable and I am of the opinion that if people can open their minds and learn from other cultures there is at least the opportunity there for learning and improving, and vice versa. Although there is much about the Island I love, I am aware of how much prejudice and ignorance there is in respect of people of other races and sexualities, though no different to many areas of the UK, and I am sure it is largely down to ignorance and recognition between people that discriminatory behaviour is acceptable. I think it is beneficial for people to come to the Island who by their very presence in society can hopefully lead to some cultural interchange. I think people whether they are from an ethnic minority or a gay should hold on to their culture and resist the pressures to integrate.

 

But I don't know exactly what you mean by respecting our homeland?