British? Just say "no." |
Britain is having a "proudness moment." The cause of it is the low birthrates of its women. Since 1973, fertility has been below replacement level, and this demographic vacuum has sucked in people from over the World who we are now told to consider "Brits."
Actually, if Emma is British then Wade was and is South African, having moved over there at a younger age (1 year old) than the age Emma moved to the UK from Canada (3 years old, I think).
On one level the message of the media is that there is a "Britain" made up of "British people," and that those "British people" can even have the occasional "proudness moment" when one of "them" achieves something. But the sting in the tail is that a Chinese-Romanian born in Canada can be and is "British." Emma is us and we are her, apparently. In other words, Britishness is about as meaningful as horsiness bestowed by someone walking through a stable.
As Canada has chosen to construct its identity on being a "country of migrants" from the opposite ends of the Earth, Fernandez's Canuck identity is much more "authentic" than Raducanu's "Britishness," as UK identity, no matter how abused this has been by the recent attempts to multiculturalise and globalise it, is still stubbornly rooted in the ethno-kingdoms that sprouted up in the Dark Ages.
People like Raducanu may now be more at home in the world than those of us who hark back to Viking times (thanks globalist elites!) But if so, why is there still a need to claim "Britishness" for her? Would she be sorely lacking something if she were not included in it, or is this more about using Raducanu as a way of altering Britishness?
Sport once existed as a mere distraction from more important and serious matters. "Bread and Circuses," as the Romans put it. Now it seems to mainly exist to tug, tear, and dissolve the parameters of identity that the new rootless order of constant racial replacement finds inconvenient.
My favourite "sport" for the time being will be to stubbornly resist these tendencies, and resolutely infuriate those who would impose them upon us.
— Hua Chunying 华春莹 (@SpokespersonCHN) September 14, 2021
Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Affirmative Right and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). He is also featured in Arktos's collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders.
A brilliant article, Colin. The whole concept of ethnic minority citizenship of Western countries is a nonsense in its own terms - what the Left and our cultural elites are really trying to say is that national loyalties are wrong and we are one human race - but in this case they would be better off arguing for abolishing citizenship and borders and nations. The confusion stems from the fact that our elites are national governments - they are quite literally employed to advance the interests of a single nation, and yet they are committed to a globalist perspective. This leads them to argue that even national citizenships rolls can contain individuals from all over the globe. This is ultimately nonsensical.
ReplyDeleteHave you considered the possibility that, like the yeoman farmer, the geoethnic identity is just never coming back in any wealthy society which isn't a city state? Most of the time I don't see anyone who cares or thinks about their national identity in any developed country, and that includes the wealthier parts of China. Maybe ye old nations are as dead as monarchy and hunter gatherer tribes, and people just need to develop new ways to make a life that don't involve trying to resurrect obsolete memes?
ReplyDelete