Since when did we all become Christians, and what does this say about identity

[egb_hibs]

I've noticed an odd trend gathering pace in news reportage recently. They seem to be using the term 'christian' no longer just to describe adherents to that religion, but to describe non-muslims generally.

I'm presuming that this is because they are reluctant to simply say 'white' for fear of turning a cultural issue into a racial one (and also cos it doesn't cover those of african descent). Equally they're presumably loathe to use british/scottish/english because they don't want to limit the boundaries of those identities on racial or current grounds.

So - this seems to make us all christians, at least under the pen of some hacks. I would have thought some would find this quite irksome.

But what would be a better term, and what does this say about the nebulous matters of identity that these journos are trying to nail?

[Dub]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I've noticed an odd trend gathering pace in news reportage recently. They seem to be using the term 'christian' no longer just to describe adherents to that religion, but to describe non-muslims generally.

I'm presuming that this is because they are reluctant to simply say 'white' for fear of turning a cultural issue into a racial one (and also cos it doesn't cover those of african descent). Equally they're presumably loathe to use british/scottish/english because they don't want to limit the boundaries of those identities on racial or current grounds.

So - this seems to make us all christians, at least under the pen of some hacks. I would have thought some would find this quite irksome.

But what would be a better term, and what does this say about the nebulous matters of identity that these journos are trying to nail?

Havent really spotted it EGB to be honest. However, I am neither a christian nor am I british but I also dont give a flying one how someone chooses to categorise me but I see what you mean, some folks out there could get offended.

As an aside, loved the book "Prayers for the Assassin" as recommended by your good self
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Dub
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Havent really spotted it EGB to be honest. However, I am neither a christian nor am I british but I also dont give a flying one how someone chooses to categorise me but I see what you mean, some folks out there could get offended.

Glad you liked the book
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[eckmf]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I've noticed an odd trend gathering pace in news reportage recently. They seem to be using the term 'christian' no longer just to describe adherents to that religion, but to describe non-muslims generally.

I'm presuming that this is because they are reluctant to simply say 'white' for fear of turning a cultural issue into a racial one (and also cos it doesn't cover those of african descent). Equally they're presumably loathe to use british/scottish/english because they don't want to limit the boundaries of those identities on racial or current grounds.

So - this seems to make us all christians, at least under the pen of some hacks. I would have thought some would find this quite irksome.

But what would be a better term, and what does this say about the nebulous matters of identity that these journos are trying to nail?

We are a christian society here in the uk, however some 30 year old's and under seem to look for any reason to question the way things are.Most of the middle east has islam at the root of its society,as is turkey and some other states.We in the west,some country's in Africa,south america are christian society's, does not mean we practice the faith,dont see the problem,sure some will find one.

[TariqE]

I think that the problem is it beings to polarise people. Those who are not christian (athiests, dunnos) find themselves on one side of the argument by way of the country they belong to. Although not christian themselves, they are in the 'christian camp' by virtue of being british/western/non-muslim in a christian country.

[hibadelic]

Historically the UK could be described as a Christian society but I'm not sure that it still can be when a minority of people practice Christianity.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by TariqE
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think that the problem is it beings to polarise people. Those who are not christian (athiests, dunnos) find themselves on one side of the argument by way of the country they belong to. Although not christian themselves, they are in the 'christian camp' by virtue of being british/western/non-muslim in a christian country.

this is close to what I mean tariq, but a bit volte-face.

I don't think these writers are trying to co-opt atheists etc as christians, rather I think it illustrates the problem in identifying any kind of common identity for members of our society, outside of those who self-declare as muslims, christians etc

[TariqE]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

this is close to what I mean tariq, but a bit volte-face.

I don't think these writers are trying to co-opt atheists etc as christians, rather I think it illustrates the problem in identifying any kind of common identity for members of our society, outside of those who self-declare as muslims, christians etc

I get what you're on about. I'm not saying that the media is trying to polarise the population but that's just an effect that they are having when using this terminology.

I see the identity problem for those who do not declare themselves as this or that. What exactly do we have in common? In the past, practically everyone in this country was christian and they had that in common. Now more people don't believe or don't care and you're right, how can we define people within the country along idealogical lines (as the media seem intent on doing) when there is no common ideology?

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by TariqE
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I get what you're on about. I'm not saying that the media is trying to polarise the population but that's just an effect that they are having when using this terminology.

I see the identity problem for those who do not declare themselves as this or that. What exactly do we have in common? In the past, practically everyone in this country was christian and they had that in common. Now more people don't believe or don't care and you're right, how can we define people within the country along idealogical lines (as the media seem intent on doing) when there is no common ideology?

It's maybe more fundamental than that? Without any common identity, do you really have a 'nation' at all, or simply a disprate collection of bods, sharing a chunk of space?

And would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

fecked if i know.

[Smurf]

Is it not the perception of us from elsewhere?

[eckmf]

Originally Posted by hibadelic
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Historically the UK could be described as a Christian society but I'm not sure that it still can be when a minority of people practice Christianity.

its not a recent thing,when I was at school,many years ago the term christian society was in use,I just cant get my head round any problem with it.When we went to assembly we sang hymms and prayed etc,im sure similar acts were carried out in other regions of the world,depending on the society the country/state based its culture on.As I have said before I have no issue with any man in the world,of any colour/creed, they are welcome in the land of my birth and nurture any time, however when I go to kashmir,kenya,goa or the gambia I respect the culture of the country and the same should happen when they come here,fit into our society.I get upset when the younger members of my family cant celebrate xmas, as it used to be when I was a kid, as it might offend certain "minorities", a lot of cash is being spent on special gowns down south to suit the religious requirements in hospitals,there are many other stupid points that cause more resentment,why not just welcome the people,let them mix and adapt to our way of living,we would all get on a lot more better.

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by eckmf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I get upset when the younger members of my family cant celebrate xmas.

I agree but just what is it we're celebrating? I know but am not so convinced as IMO the Christmas message was long ago lost.

Why? Very few practicing 'Christians'.

Lets be honest Christmas is a feast of decadence..

[hibadelic]

Originally Posted by The Flair Team
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I agree but just what is it we're celebrating?

Santa's Brithday

Originally Posted by The Flair Team
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I know but am not so convinced as IMO the Christmas message was long ago lost.

Why? Very few practicing 'Christians'.

Lets be honest Christmas is a feast of decadence..

Isn't gluttony one of the deadly sins?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by hibadelic
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Santa's Brithday

More probably believe or think that than any other version..

Originally Posted by hibadelic
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Isn't gluttony one of the deadly sins?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Excatly. Christmas is anything but 'Christian' but as it's the only real 'Christian' ocassion with high participation.. It would be like Turkey's voting for Christmas..

[hibadelic]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

But what would be a better term, and what does this say about the nebulous matters of identity that these journos are trying to nail?

Sorry for my part in the hi-jacking
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What about "Non-Muslim British" as a more accurate term?

[Gareth]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It's maybe more fundamental than that? Without any common identity, do you really have a 'nation' at all, or simply a disprate collection of bods, sharing a chunk of space?And would that be a good thing or a bad thing?
fecked if i know.

A wise man once described the concept of nationhood as an 'imagined community' which I think I pretty much agree with and don't really see any major problem with it to be honest.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by hibadelic
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Sorry for my part in the hi-jacking
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What about "Non-Muslim British" as a more accurate term?

That would do in some contexts. In others it's limited through being a bit of a negative identity if you follow me, ie defined by what it's not.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Gareth
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

A wise man once described the concept of nationhood as an 'imagined community' which I think I pretty much agree with and don't really see any major problem with it to be honest.

Every product of abstract thought is imaginary and meaningless but nihilism has had some serious implementation problems as an alternative strategy
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Thing is - and I seem to recall reading that this is something that seriously worries the modern social democratic left parties, including labour - in the absence of some kind of shared i.d. people really do not go a whole bunch on any idea of collectivism or redistribution.

The gaggle of unconnected individuals is much more in tune with ultra-liberal market states; rootless labourers following da money etc, defined (if at all) not by the society they come from but where they earn their dosh and where they spend it. But even there I doubt it can last, and I also - my own preferences for moderate liberal / capitalism notwithstanding - am dubious about whether it is a 'good thing'.

It's a tricky one this. I confess I've no idea what is to be done about it.

[Gareth]

I think the Labour Party have been on eof the prime pushers of this sort of outlook though. Their complete dismissal of question of class for example meant that as an electoral machine they were no longer looking for votes on the basis of any intrinsic sense of belonging. People voting were encouraged to become consumers with no strong ties.
I don't see why not having a strong sense of national identity means we have no sense of belonging though. We all have multiple identities that link us more or less strongly with our neighbours/workmates etc etc. I don't see that artificially creating, or at least attempting to create, a homogenous sense of identity takes us anywhere in relation to binding us together, except in the past as a source of obedience. In my view people will feel more 'connected' in terms of identity if they are free to choose what and with whom they identify.