Britishness, identity and the liberal interpretation of Man There has been a lot of Establishment hand-ringing of late over the waning sense of Britishness among the natives of these islands. Specifically, the hand-wringing is about the uncomfortable likelihood that by being true to themselves the natives will leave the Third World of Bradford, Leicester, Peckham and Hounslow high and dry, together with their newly minted British identities. The future of the great coerced experiment of the Multicult in England, particularly, is riding on whether the pols can keep us from understanding our own distinctiveness. They, however, can only approach the issue in one way, which is also the wrong way ... as a crisis of that fungible commodity, “identity”:-
To demonstrate that his sudden concern for English children is indeed motivated by something other than compassion, the half-caste Mr Ajegbo informs us:-
But why would they not feel “disenfranched and resentful”? Has it not occurred to Mr Ajegbo that, cast as sinners, they are actually the sinned against? As immigration’s victims they have nothing to gain from “creating community cohesion”. The only thing that is worse than a multiculturalism that doesn’t work is, as they say, one that does. For different reasons to Mr Ajegbo (ie, non-racial), our Prime Minister in Waiting is also trying desperately hard to sell an inclusive Britishness. In his case, if the natives begin to sense their distinctiveness and to act as such, his position at No.10 will have no moral legitimacy. He is plainly scared to death that the times they are a-changing, and he has missed his moment:-
In fact, the picture is almost certainly worse for Brown than the survey reported here reveals, since its “English respondents” must have included some who were anything but. Yesterday evening, BBC News featured a black member of the public telling us in a West Indian accent that he felt more English than British (followed by a Chinese girl laying claim to Scottishness). The elite, it seems, so abhors race, it can’t stop itself processing “English”, “Scottish or “Welsh” as a mere identity issue. No doubt there will be many more reports of Black “English identity” as Britishness slides further towards the eponymous historical dustbin. “Identity”, then, will have to go! It is a slippery concept, and one that we do not need to rely upon. It does not and cannot belong to us, only to the left. Its utility rests in its making the “identifier” the active principle, whilst rendering supine and open to any abuse the object of his attention. The implication is always of something elected. Identity is not who you are, but who you feel yourself to be. Black and English? If a black describes himself thus, so he is. In liberalism, Englishness cannot be prescriptive. The underlying philosophical idea of an elected identity is, of course, the free and unfettered will. Like any act of re-invention it is contingent upon a rejection of existential facts. Those facts are construed by liberalism as a tyranny. Something unchosen - even our own natures - is imposed, and if it is imposed it is tyrannical. The only medecine is the application of human will. Liberalism - the rejection of Nature - and all the noisy claptrap about rights are meant to be the unfettering of the will. But there is a rather large problem. Identity = not I. We receive the truer part of our psyches from our nature and, to some extent, in and through the historical culture that envelopes us from birth. Flight from this is not possible, because there is nothing else of any solidity to fly to. Choosing an identity, therefore, never rises above pretence and escapism. It is dishonest. Its devotees don’t notice this, or the vanity of a wholesale denial of Nature, because liberalism assigns ultimate value to self-will. So, for example, normal masculinity and feminity which rise out of the rock of Nature have a negative value to liberalism and must also be denied. Further, what we might call the semi-permanencies of bio-culture (my Englishness, say, which unites me to my kin past and present, and to the England of Shakespeare and Pitt) also have a negative value. In liberalism both share exactly the same value as the third component of self: the ubiquities of individual personality which are acquired entirely through the accident of time and place ... “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” In this blanket denial of the non-willed self, liberalism differs from serious spirituality. The latter bears no animus against Nature. Without permanency there would be no spirituality. It promises, therefore, only an escape from the tyranny of the acquired - or illusion, exile, the veil of tears and so on - to a still, essential centre which, so it goes, may then be propagated through a suffering dedication many years long. In fact, it is precisely this version of the perfectionment of self that was purloined by 18th century secular liberal philosophy and re-presented as a socialised revolt against the given. From a spiritual perspective it has “counterfeit” stamped all over it. The self freed a second or two ago by some exercise of choice is just another moment in a life of illusion. Still, there is clearly a powerful attraction to the modern mind in this field of endless potential ... this magically renewable tabula rasa upon which we can vanquish the demon of tyranny and author whatever “self” takes our promiscuous fancy. After all, do we not have only to perceive our given “limits” and “boundaries” to find them non-existent? Does not, for example, the too, too insensitive and dominant male self of the typical MR poster have only to explore its masculinity - so obviously oppressive to the too, too non-assertive and never hormone-bound female self - for its supporting sub-structures to melt into mere convention and superfluity? Personal fulfillment as a male hausfrau beckons, along with the freedom after midnight to be a cross-dressing denizen of London’s public parks. Perhaps someone with a name ending in witz will show us soon how to be Black. Or how to be British once again. But, of course, we can’t accomplish any of that. Liberalism is a teleology. It doesn’t really matter that its acolytes - or, perhaps, atomites - stagger from one wilfull destruction to another, with nothing to fall back upon but lightness of being and a heart untroubled by a single deep love. It does matter, though, that a sense of nation is a deep love, and nothing of the liberal condition can survive beside it. Gordon Brown and Mr Ajegbo please note. Comments:2
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 01:46 | # Britney British, at your blog you issue a challenge to your readers to:
I accept: will this do? (I think you’ll find it will ...) 3
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:08 | # The high regard in which the Blair government holds Britishness and Identity can be observed at : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,24391-2558004,00.html 5
Posted by Robert of the Rohirrim on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:11 | # Years from now, when there is civil war in many formerly all-white countries, we must remember what tribe was the main pusher and funder of open borders, multiculturalism, miscega.. miskega.. oh, hell, who was encouraging black men to stick it to white women. We will remember what tribe hid the facts about black on white crime (hundreds of times higher than white on black crime). Before we fire a shot in the race war, we should first bring to justice all of the leaders of this devilish tribe. We know their names. Remember, white boy, your chance will come. 6
Posted by Tim Jensen on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 06:01 | # Fred Scrroby, 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 06:40 | #
Truer words were never written. 8
Posted by Jim on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 11:07 | # I envy the US citizens protected by their first and second amendments. What incredibly enlightened founders your country had. Of course most of us have no free-speech and even less capacity to bear arms. 9
Posted by Kenelm Digby on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:58 | # Why does the name ‘Sir Keith Ajegbo’ jar so much? 10
Posted by East Asian cognitive elitism on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 15:00 | # http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/01/women_sold_as_g.php 11
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 15:01 | # A log entry by Jim Kalb up today over at Turnabout is à propos:
And have a look at this reply, by a Turnabout regular who signs as “MD”:
Not much more to be added to the last line of MD’s comment, is there ... 12
Posted by PF on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:48 | # A historical parallel to this was when the Emperor Caracalla issued the Constitutio Antoniniana” in the 3rd century. It made all subjects of the Roman Empire into official Roman citizens. This in my view was responsible for destroying the Italo-centric elitist Roman identity, so that Romani could no longer be addressed as a group- and could no longer percieve themselves as a group. In the following century Rome decayed miserably, and another century swept the Western Empire entirely away. Could you please clarify this statement though: I dont quite get what you’re saying there. 13
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 19:33 | # PF, a slave in his waking state is a slave in his waking state whether or not he is liberated according to Locke, Rousseau, Marx or Rawls. Post a comment:
Next entry: Frontierist News Roundup 20070126
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Britney British on Fri, 26 Jan 2007 00:44 | #
At last someone has noticed the white man!
Yes, we live in Britain too! Where is the support network for us? Where are the government funded organisations?
I am proud to anounce the one and only organisation in Britain which sticks up for infidels in need…
http://infidelcouncilofbritain.blogspot.com
A spoof in the making. Let me know of any infidels who need comic support and publicity for their stories.
p.s. thanks for the link…link back in a second.