I really like your analogy with art, MoE, although I fear it wouldn't prove massively illuminating if presented to a class of under-grads.

The last para is the one that's always absolutely crucial to remember when discussing all this, though.

ursus arctos wrote:


Yeah, there are a fair few in London now. Kurz & Lang in Smithfield is where I generally go when I'm drinking in that part of town: Bratwurst, Krakauer, Kasekrainer, etc, plus Brezel, Sauerkraut, Bratkartoffeln and a Pils. But I don't consider it all that English.

Then the part of stating ethnic origin was also strange. There were many expected options for most races, i.e. Black - African; Black - Caribbean; Asian - Indian; Asian - Bengali etc. However, scroll down to the bottom and you just had "white". I don't consider myself "white."

I applied for a library card when I was in the UK last year and was surprised, even slightly shocked, to be asked questions like those above. Race, like gender, is out of bounds as question on job applications, or any other kind of form, in Canada. It's a direct contravention of the charter of rights and freedoms. It was my own reaction which surprised me more than anything. Unconsciously, I've just accepted that such question are personal. It'd be like asking someone if they had sex last night.

E10 Rifle wrote:


Is that Herman Ze German? Decent enough Currywurst and chips.

Nowhere (not even the German Deli at Borough Market) does the right sort of breat though however good the wurst is. Its all too soft, I want something with a bit of crust to it.

Is that a regional thing though? My wurst experiences have all been in Hesse. If I went somwhere else would I get different bread?

Mykolai on Earth wrote:

Nice markups on the beer.

You'd get a better experience. Ha, ha.

Actually that doesn't work written down, does it...

<Another joke ruined by bad timing...>

Amor de Cosmos wrote:


How else would you find out if you were excluding or not attracting certain minorities or genders?

You can get perfectly good german style bratwurst in Lidl and Costco these days. There's no bratwurst dearth in the UK any more.

As for cultural identity or whatever, I think really unless there's something specific that makes no sense, you're whatever you think you are. If you've no Polish ancestors and have never been to Poland, you're going to have a hard time claiming that you're Polish. But I think it's not unreasonable to define yourself as being whatever you think has had the largest influence on you, whether it's the nationality or ethnicity or a parent, or of where you were born, or where you were bought up, or where you've lived as an adult.

Anyone who wants to try and define you by their own rules is just being a prescriptive arse. The point being that cultural identity is almost be definition "how you feel about yourself" so it's a nonsense for someone else, rather than yourself, to prescribe that.

As a very recent immigrant to the US, I still feel completely English (not really in a tribal way apart from supporting the cricket team (because I like them) and the football team (even though they're all despicable cunts)). My attitudes and accent and my English pronunciation of places like Berkeley all make me English. But most of all, most of my references and roots belong in the place I spent my first 40 years. I imagine over the course of time that's going to shift and I'm going to become Anglo-American of some sort or other.

What I hate the idea of is being as ex-pat, in the sense of belonging to ex-pat organisations, mingling only with my own kind. Of people who're always looking back at the old country, doing "English" (or "British") things with "English" people. It's such a reactionary attitude, always dreaming of where you once were, but even worse, dreaming of some hideous pastiche of where you came from. I already encounter people who want to hook me up with other English people. It's weird. Really weird. Did I really move to the US so I could be with the English? Am I really meant to get on better with English people who've been in the US for a decade but who I have nothing in common with than with Americans who are actually interesting?

Yeah, I was going to say that. I don't like just being called "white" but I recognize that it makes sense for most research purposes.

I always thought the term "ex-pat" implied a sort of sophisticated, exciting, and perhaps even glamorous life, like that of Ernest Hemingway or Rick Blaine.


I don't disagree, but no doubt one's concept of what the "entire point of the exercise" ought to be is largely determined by education and, dare I say it, class. For a lot of people, moving to another country is just a question of survival and/or giving the next generation a better chance.

one thing this thread has reminded me of, is that Ed milliband is leader of the Labour party, and that pisses me off.

I've been going through a cycle where I'm idly wondering who the leader of the british labour party is, or I see him on television, and then I suddenly remember that I knew who the leader of the labour party was all along, but that I am so horrified that he is such a spineless gimp. And Then I remember that every time I am reminded I have to go through a lengthy process of forgetting who he is, to expunge him from my memory, and wipe the pain from my heart.

I then have a couple of happy days, sometimes weeks before I discover to my horror yet again that ed milliband is leader of the labour party.

I'd say it would be very interesting to do a genetic survey of the North east of england. Wave after wave of invaders has washed through that place. During the roman occupation, the area was garrisoned with troops from the Black sea, and a hell of a lot of them settled down in the area, and got busy introducing a lot of genetic diversity into the area. Then you have the continual incursions of the scots, the Vikings, the normans, the connection with holland, wave after wave of irish emigration.

But it is also worth noting that any time they dig up bronze age bones across europe that they can get a DNA sample from, it usually turns out that at least a third of the locals are direct line descendants of this bronze age man. So while there has been a lot of moving around, there has been a hell of a lot of staying in the same place too.

Seriously, what does DNA matter except to you Celtic racial supremacists?

I'm sure language has a lot to do with it. If I moved to Britain, I can't imagine I'd seek out other Americans, unless there were something baseball or gridiron-related going on that necessitated it. But if I were in Germany or France, I imagine I probably would just to give my brain a rest from all of that language effort.

Likewise, I can see why people do that here. For example, it's a constant struggle with foreign students at the university here, especially the Chinese students. They report that they really want to branch out and meet lots of people and hang out more with their colleagues but it's difficult with the language so they often tend to just end up hanging out with other Chinese students. Better that than feel totally isolated. That's not as much of an issue with people from the subcontinent who speak English. Although again, sports can be a unifier. All of those guys I see playing cricket appear to be from India or Pakistan or thereabouts.

Amor de Cosmos wrote:


It's for purposes of equal opportunities monitoring--but you knew that, I'm sure.

La Lanterne Rouge wrote:


Not sure I agree with that. If I wanted to describe myself as, say, Cherokee Native American, it could reasonably be objected, not least by actual Cherokee, that this is simply not the case.

And I think this isn't entirely academic. I'm obviously not about to describe myself as Cherokee, but there are those in the US, seekers after a bit of tribal glamour to spice up their surburban reality, who do make such claims on pretty slender grounds, to the extent that it's become a bit of an issue with tribal elders and people like that.

How else would you find out if you were excluding or not attracting certain minorities or genders?

Library application forms — and other application materials at banks and so on — are supplied in about eight different languages, which presumably is designed to makes them as inclusive as possible.

Asking for ethnic/gender/age information on job applications is forbidden as a hiring practice because, in a general sense, such factors have nothing to do with one's ability to do a job. Specific positions obviously require particular skills, so it's OK to ask what languages one can speak for instance, but not to ask about ethnicity. In practice it's possible to intuit such information from a resumé but it can't be asked directly by a potential employer. The idea is to make exclusion difficult by not privileging employers with unnecessary information and by making them aware such using ethnicity as a factor in hiring is illegal.

It's for purposes of equal opportunities monitoring--but you knew that, I'm sure.

That's what I assumed, yes.

Amor de Cosmos wrote:


There are very strict rules here: information for monitoring purposes must go on a separate, detachable part of the form that doesn't go to any members of the appointments panel, and that contains no means of identifying the candidate. Any breach, if it became known, would land an employer in the hottest water you can imagine.

Not wanting to be arsey, but I think you may have come away with a false impression.

I was recounting my response, one of surprise. Not evaluating one system over another. I understand it's about perception, not reality.

10^7, the better bratwurst that you had in Hesse are very likely to have been from Thuringen, and you will also get proper bread there.

It absolutely has to have a crust.

A proper German wurst purveyor will have different kinds of bread (and mustard) to accompany different kinds of wurst.

Mykolai on Earth wrote:


Dude, stop being such a little Eichmann.

More Elizabeth Warren than Eichmann, I'd say.