“Britishness” With the Jingos – Part 2

Part 1 can be found here

Anon #2:  Is Alex Salmond a racist white supremacist? What about Martin McGuinness? Would you call him a bigot? Was Gandhi a bigot? What about Sitting Bull – patriot or racist xenophobic bigot? When Muhammad Ali proclaimed he wanted his grandchildren to look like him was he a racist bigot? What really bugs me about “anti-racism” is how racist it is.

 

Paddy: You constructed a straw-man. There’s no point in me defending arguments I’ve never made. Although, I do appreciate that you felt the need to pull out a generic copy/pasted response to confront me.

 

Anon #1: “That was a lazy trap and a pointless detour. You can surely do better. For a start, you respond to my questions. I’ve had the courtesy to reply to yours, however (momentarily) distracting.”

No you haven’t. You’re a very evil kind of liar, and here’s why. You know that to define Nigerian-ness would be to open yourself up to the same scrutiny to which you give Britishness.

While it is true that not every British person is an identikit fit, there are indeed many commonalities between British people that make up British culture – I’ve given you quite a few, but you are saying that since you AS AN INDIVIDUAL don’t engage in those acts, that it is NOT BRITISH. Not only is this kind of anecdotal evidence worthless, but it is also very dangerous. Obviously anyone intelligent enough can see through your facade, but my worry is that a great deal of morons who are allowed to vote and are swayed by such nonsense, will vote on that basis.

Paddy: I’ve already preempted most of your silly remarks in my previous post. I suggest you read it. In short it went:

There is probably no comprehensive, singular Nigerian identity we can speak of, just as there is probably no British one. It would be arrogant and hypocritical to claim otherwise, particularly without evidence. This position was made pretty clear in my last post.

So where have you got this silly idea that I believe in Nigerian-ness from? Short answer: your imagination. There is where I will stop humoring you and this silly diversion and be temporarily abrupt: I haven’t fallen into your silly trap (which would go to demonstrate that I’m some sort of selective cultural-relativist? I’m not sure what angle you desired) so stop pretending that I have or will.

 

Anon #1: “Now, will you actually respond to my rebuttal to your ideas of Britishness?”

I answered your question with a question. Since you were unable to answer, it proves that asking what “Britishness” is was a simple trap, something you have now accused me of. This is psychological projection. If you have an IQ of >80 like you claim to have, you’d see this plainly.

“That’s the only way this conversion can really go anywhere considering it’s the subject of this conversation.”

A simple re-framing of your question exposed it as the ridiculous, simplification fallacy that it was. Liberalism can only win debates by establishing the original frame. Once that question is reflected, it usually goes unanswered or you see shaming language and multiple fallacies compounded onto each other.

 

Paddy: Do I really have to spell out what’s going on here? Do you really want me to be that condescending towards you? Ah, well then, here we go.

I promise to make it reeeally simple:

You claimed to know all about what it means to be “British”. I asked you what exactly this meant – an important question, the parameters of club membership need to be made clear – and got a list which went from: drinking something which originated in Asia to liking barbecues and driving a Mini via speaking with an English accent (this last one was probably the most stupid thing I’ve read in a long time). Anybody which couldn’t meet all those characteristics was, in your mind, non-British. I pointed out the absurdity of such a list, offering individual and brilliantly crafted rebuttals to each point.

…This is when you brought up “Nigerian-ness”.

Seeing as I now pointed out how silly and potentially irrelevant that was, I would like to return to conceptions of Britishness – something you claimed to know all about.

(Oh, and how you wound me by suggesting I am a Liberal. Oh woe.)

 

Anon #2: Why should labels be seen as weapons? Not everybody uses labels to stifle opposition.

 

Paddy: I’ll admit I am not sure what context he was using it in – it’s in amongst a paragraph which would bamboozle the most competent linguistics academia has to offer.

Though I’m willing to wager that ol’ Ronnie isn’t a fan of Liberals (they tend to be opposed to nationalist and race-based movements by definition, in both the Classical and the modern sense). Although, it’s comforting to see that my mention of Liberalism was the only thing you could pick me up on in your efforts to support Captain Britain over here. By ignoring the substance of my central argument you’re supporting me more than you know.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *