Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Oh, a humourous copycat thread.



Anyway - to address the question posed:


The fundamental difference is the geographical origin of the two peoples.


However, in certain contexts, this difference is irrelevant. For example, if we are examining a person's entitlement to a British passport, then whether they are Welsh or English is of no significance whatsoever. To the best of my knowledge.

I understand perfectly well that it is Honourable,reasonable,fair and humane not to have any Prejudice.This is 100% correct ...but couldn't we just make a very small exception for The Welsh please.... ;) After all we used to quite dislike them in the days before Racism was bad:))

Considering their impact on London and the activities they engage in there is no difference and it is therefore not necessary to differentiated between them in any way.


So if the question of a Welsh person?s nationality comes up in a work or social situation it is perfectly acceptable to refer to them as English and be indifferent if they take offence. The same applies vice versa of course.

'ello boyo, yakky dah and all that. My, very good, Welsh friends tell me they are actually English, as when the barbarians invaded (Vikings etc) they pushed the original engish westwards. So the Welsh are the true 'natives' of the British Isles and the rest of you are johnny come lately's. www.museumwales.ac.uk/ if you're down there go, it's brilliant.

Well technically the Germanic cultures pushed out the predominantly Celtic cultures of the British Isles but the Celtic influence was a previous import from Europe as well.


There are also similarities between pre Celtic British burial sights and those of a similar age in Europe suggesting that at least 1 more cultural colonisation had taken place prior to the Celts

Spot on Brendan, though even more technically the 'Celtic' cultures weren't even that Celtic, that being a misnomer heaped on them by a (ironically welsh) chap who actually thought the Celts were Central European Germanics, which they weren't.


Not to say there was no celtic influence, which there was, it was just much much less so than the stock misunderstanding, as given us by EDOldie, would have us think.


And yes ratty the Celts did wander up the Atlantic coast from Spain/southern France.


Right Brendan, remind me to give you that book when next we meet.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...