Nick Griffin

L'Ange Corrigeant · 01-08-2005, 02:18 PM

From the British Nazi Party's Manifesto

Quote:

It should be deeply worrying to anyone who values traditional cultures and the rich patchwork of human variety to read what Prof. Bill Sutherland, Population Biologist at the University of East Anglia, has discovered about the status of the 6,800 languages of the world: Over the last five hundred years, they have been disappearing faster than species - 4.5% of total number have been lost over the last 500 years, compared with 1.3% of bird species and 1.9% of mammals.

None of which sounds too drastic. The real problem, however, is from here onwards. According to Prof. Sutherland at least half of mankind's 6,800 living languages will be dead by 2050, and 90% of them will be extinct by 2100. Every one of those extinctions will mean another group of people who are cut off from their roots and their ancestors by an unbridgeable chasm. Every single one diminishes the variety which makes our world such an interesting and wonderful place.

Among those at gravest risk are Welsh, Scots Gaelic and Irish Gaelic. And although English is one of the 10% of ‘safe' languages, the fact remains that all the vanishing tongues should alert us, like so many miners' canaries, to the existence of an invisible but deadly poison which threatens every culture and distinct ethnic group in the world.
[...]
Our proposals:
[...]
7. Except for purposes of teaching foreign languages to native speakers of English, the only languages permitted in official documents, government business, and schools will be English, Scots, and Welsh. The use of other languages by ethnic minorities in their own homes, school and institutions will also be encouraged.

Maybe I'm just being naive, but are Urdu, French and Gujurati really threats to the survival of the English language? And more importantly, is the best way to preserve Scots Gaelic, Irish, Cornish and Ulster Scots really banning them?

SGK · 01-08-2005, 02:48 PM

This is a subject quite close to my heart. Unfortunately, language is used for and linked with political objectives. Hence an attempt in the past to erradicate the Celtic languages from Britain.

Ironically, I heard a Welshman, in a TV debate a while ago, argue against Welsh independence because he believed it would see the death of Welsh. His reasoning being that it was only a desire to maintain a Welsh identity that had created the revival of the language, a need that would be lost once Wales became independent.

The figures regarding the loss of languages is alarming and saddening. I don't have the figures to hand, but when looked at in detail, the vast majority are the languages of the Native American tribes and the Australian Aboriginal tribes. Many are already spoken by their last handful of speakers. It is too late to save most, more to the point, it is out of the hands of the British.

I believe in conserving and encouraging the indigenous languages of the UK. These are Welsh - now pretty secure - Scottish Gaelic, spoken in the Western Isles and diminishing, Cornish, and Irish. Irish is unlikely to die out because of the Republic of Ireland.

Note Scots is not Celtic and, although has recently been awarded status as a language which qualifies it for government grants, I consider it to be simply a strong dialect.

How languages are to be supported is open to debate. I don't agree with throwing money at the issue. I think encouragement is often enough.

For the record, I don't believe it is a part of the road to independence.

I think what the BNP wants is to make immigrant languages officially unofficial and therefore not supported. I tend to agree with this. How can the British government talk about encouraging integration but then put up signs and print official documents in multiple languages negating the need to learn English? Hypocritical if you ask me.

Also, whilst we're at it, I do think we suffer from a PC attitude towards US English (a misnomer if ever there was one!). Why are we so reluctant to condemn it? US English is correct in the US, but in the UK it is simply wrong.

nyorks-patriot · 01-08-2005, 04:07 PM

If the BNP where in power im sure all Scots and Welsh people would leave school fluent in their own native languages.

Simon · 01-08-2005, 04:31 PM

The reason why the BNP say that “the only languages permitted in official documents, government business, and schools will be English, Scots, and Welsh” is not because Urdu, French and Gujurati are threats to the survival of the English language, or any other language. Nowhere in the manifesto does it say that. In fact, the exact opposite is said: "English is one of the 10% of ‘safe' languages".

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-08-2005, 02:48 PM	#2 (permalink)
SGK Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,237	This is a subject quite close to my heart. Unfortunately, language is used for and linked with political objectives. Hence an attempt in the past to erradicate the Celtic languages from Britain. Ironically, I heard a Welshman, in a TV debate a while ago, argue against Welsh independence because he believed it would see the death of Welsh. His reasoning being that it was only a desire to maintain a Welsh identity that had created the revival of the language, a need that would be lost once Wales became independent. The figures regarding the loss of languages is alarming and saddening. I don't have the figures to hand, but when looked at in detail, the vast majority are the languages of the Native American tribes and the Australian Aboriginal tribes. Many are already spoken by their last handful of speakers. It is too late to save most, more to the point, it is out of the hands of the British. I believe in conserving and encouraging the indigenous languages of the UK. These are Welsh - now pretty secure - Scottish Gaelic, spoken in the Western Isles and diminishing, Cornish, and Irish. Irish is unlikely to die out because of the Republic of Ireland. Note Scots is not Celtic and, although has recently been awarded status as a language which qualifies it for government grants, I consider it to be simply a strong dialect. How languages are to be supported is open to debate. I don't agree with throwing money at the issue. I think encouragement is often enough. For the record, I don't believe it is a part of the road to independence. I think what the BNP wants is to make immigrant languages officially unofficial and therefore not supported. I tend to agree with this. How can the British government talk about encouraging integration but then put up signs and print official documents in multiple languages negating the need to learn English? Hypocritical if you ask me. Also, whilst we're at it, I do think we suffer from a PC attitude towards US English (a misnomer if ever there was one!). Why are we so reluctant to condemn it? US English is correct in the US, but in the UK it is simply wrong.

01-08-2005, 04:07 PM	#3 (permalink)
nyorks-patriot Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 653	If the BNP where in power im sure all Scots and Welsh people would leave school fluent in their own native languages.

01-08-2005, 04:31 PM	#4 (permalink)
Simon Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 391	The reason why the BNP say that “the only languages permitted in official documents, government business, and schools will be English, Scots, and Welsh” is not because Urdu, French and Gujurati are threats to the survival of the English language, or any other language. Nowhere in the manifesto does it say that. In fact, the exact opposite is said: "English is one of the 10% of ‘safe' languages".