"The British Isles" - wikipedia

thetourist

Please partake in an online survey of feelings about the term "The British Isles" for wikipedia. Information on the term/area etc can be found by searching on wikipedia. There has been some debate on that page reguarding just what percentage of irish people have a dificulty with the term and we are trying to do a survey about it - please make your vote and try to get as many others to vote tool; the more votes the better the result.

Edit: Naturally this survey will only mean something if everyone who takes part is from the republic of ireland or has some relationship to it .... thank you for your comments. .... and please dont let the argument spoil your day

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

*puts a curse on thetourist*

Banphrionsa

The colonial mentality is hard to shake after 700 years.

Blisterman

Who cares if it's called the British Isles.
The Indian Ocean is called that, despite touching many countries. and noone has a problem with that.

Guy:Incognito

The english dont give out abotu the irsih sea. We're part of the british isles, not great britain, it's two different things and it's doing us no harm.

Big Ears

The British Isles is a geographical term like Scandinavia and we happen to be inside the British Isles..................they have the Irish Sea beside them , so who really cares anyway .

DOLEMAN

Competition Time

Find Ireland on this page - http://www.yrigfp.com/countries.asp

Winner gets to feel angry...

mike65

AH sensible replies shock!

edit> burn down Pizza Hut! (well, do that anyway!)

Mike.

WhiteWashMan

i have no problem with west britain being part of the british isles.

and i bet those people in the scilly isles are all stupid too...

smashey

I have a problem with it. This goes back to when I was working overseas and tried to explain to a local that I am not British. She duly informed me that we were part of the British Isles. After a brief argument, she accepted my explanation that the British Isles were named by the British and that they tended not to care for my ancestor's feelings back in those days.

Flex

I have a problem with that term. Ireland is not a 'British Isle' and these islands are not the 'Isles of the British' either. The British arnt the only race/people who inhabit this archipeligo, the Irish do aswel. They should be referred to as the 'British and Irish Isles' or Ireland and its offshore islands detached from the Irish mainland should have its own geographical designation as the 'Irish Isles'. Why not call the Iberian Peninsula the Spanish Peninsula? Makes as much sense as putting Ireland under the geographical term in question.

Flex

WhiteWashMan wrote:

i have no problem with west britain being part of the british isles.

and i bet those people in the scilly isles are all stupid too...

West Britain? Do you mean Wales?

darkman2

thetourist wrote:

Please partake in an online survey of feelings about the term "The British Isles" for wikipedia. Information on the term/area etc can be found by searching on wikipedia. There has been some debate on that page reguarding just what percentage of irish people have a dificulty with the term and we are trying to do a survey about it - please make your vote and try to get as many others to vote tool; the more votes the better the result.

Edit: Naturally this survey will only mean something if everyone who takes part is from the republic of ireland or has some relationship to it .... thank you for your comments. .... and please dont let the argument spoil your day

Of course the term 'British Isles' is ONLY used by the British and often it come across as antagonistic when its not really meant to be. Of course the name should be scrapped as its implying a geopolitical context which is inappropriate.

Dont be at yourself

Jesus, people have very little to be complain about if they're getting upset over the name of a chain of islands.

They're called the British Isles, it doesnt mean we swear allegience to the queen or anything. It's just a name.

Pompey Magnus

DOLEMAN wrote:

Competition Time

Find Ireland on this page - http://www.yrigfp.com/countries.asp

Winner gets to feel angry...

Well to be fair they don't include Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan or the Vatican City State either so we won't be alone in feeling indignant.

darkman2

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Jesus, people have very little to be complain about if they're getting upset over the name of a chain of islands.

They're called the British Isles, it doesnt mean we swear allegience to the queen or anything. It's just a name.

Only the British refer to it as that. Isnt that strange?:rolleyes:

aidan_walsh

/me bursts into a rousing chorus of "A Nation Once Again"

DOLEMAN

Depeche_Mode wrote:

Well to be fair they don't include Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan or the Vatican City State either so we won't be alone in feeling indignant.

Wrong!

Look under United Kingdom...

aidan_walsh

darkman2 wrote:

Only the British refer to it as that. Isnt that strange?:rolleyes:

Cartographers, too.

darkman2

aidan_walsh wrote:

Cartographers, too.

Yeah British Cartographers. I have a world map from the US and it dosnt say BIs:)

aidan_walsh

DOLEMAN wrote:

Wrong!

Look under United Kingdom...

I don't see Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan or the Vatican City State listed under United Kingdom...

Dont be at yourself

darkman2 wrote:

Only the British refer to it as that. Isnt that strange?:rolleyes:

No they don't, I've been across the world and heard people refer to them as the British Isles. What else have you heard them refered to as?

What I find strange is that the Irish seem to be the only population in the world who get their knickers in a twist about even the slightest hint of this kind of thing, even when (or perhaps because of) their knowledge of Irish history comes from the Micheal Collins movie and Dubliners songs.

To me, personally, I couldn't give a flying **** what the islands are refered to as. I dont see it as an affront to my freedoms, I dont think that it's the build-up to a beach landing by the brits in Dublin Bay, it makes absolutely no difference to me. Move on.

p.pete

Depeche_Mode wrote:

Well to be fair they don't include Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan or the Vatican City State either so we won't be alone in feeling indignant.

We are included, you just didn't find it

Pompey Magnus

DOLEMAN wrote:

Wrong!

Look under United Kingdom...

:eek:

Never even thought of looking there...

Flex

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

No they don't, I've been across the world and heard people refer to them as the British Isles. What else have you heard them refered to as?

What I find strange is that the Irish seem to be the only population in the world who get their knickers in a twist about even the slightest hint of this kind of thing, even when (or perhaps because of) their knowledge of Irish history comes from the Micheal Collins movie and Dubliners songs.

To me, personally, I couldn't give a flying **** what the islands are refered to as. I dont see it as an affront to my freedoms, I dont think that it's the build-up to a beach landing by the brits in Dublin Bay, it makes absolutely no difference to me. Move on.

Hypothethical situation. If Poland was referred to as being part of some geographic designation like 'The Germanic Plains' or 'Greater Germany' and some Poles didnt like this term, what would you think?

New_Departure06

I resent Ireland being termed a "British isle". Let them use the term for Britain, the Isle of Man, and the islands that are part of Scotland, England, Wales and the dependencies of the UK.

darkman2

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

No they don't, I've been across the world and heard people refer to them as the British Isles. What else have you heard them refered to as?

What I find strange is that the Irish seem to be the only population in the world who get their knickers in a twist about even the slightest hint of this kind of thing, even when (or perhaps because of) their knowledge of Irish history comes from the Micheal Collins movie and Dubliners songs.

To me, personally, I couldn't give a flying **** what the islands are refered to as. I dont see it as an affront to my freedoms, I dont think that it's the build-up to a beach landing by the brits in Dublin Bay, it makes absolutely no difference to me. Move on.

The point is we have absolutely nothing to do with the UK politically and therefore we should, as the only soveriegn nation in these islands (if you include the UK as a union of nations), be consulted at least on what we refer our side of the fence to. Its really just a pot shot from the brits, this BIs thing. I dont care either way, im just explaining the practicalities.

Dont be at yourself

Hypothethical situation. If Poland was referred to as being part of some geographic designation like 'The Germanic Plains' or 'Greater Germany' and some Poles didnt like this term, what would you think?

Well, if the "Germanic Plains" was a term that has been used far and wide for centuries to describe a geographical location, I'd have no problem with it whatsoever.

Actually hey, are you going fight for the oppressed peoples of the Americas? I mean, how can they put up with those US bastards trying to claim the rest of the continents too!

Dont be at yourself

The point is we have absolutely nothing to do with the UK politically and therefore we should, as the only soveriegn nation in these islands (if you include the UK as a union of nations), be consulted at least on what we refer our side of the fence to. Its really just a pot shot from the brits, this BIs thing. I dont care either way, im just explaining the practicalities.

Right, who should the Irish government get on the phone to to correct this injustice? Face it, the reason that you see the islands refered to as the British Islands is not because of some sort of imperialistic scheme hatched by the British government - it's because that's what people across the world have referred to the islands as for hundreds of years. Do you suggest that we write letters to all of these people and tell them not to, because it somehow, vaguelly, oppresses you?

Guy:Incognito

Right, lets form an army to go over and free the canadians from the tyranny of america and stop them being included in the term north america.



"what, what do you mean no one cares"? "but the irish, they get so annoyed about these pointless things"?

darkman2

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Right, who should the Irish government get on the phone to to correct this injustice? Face it, the reason that you see the islands refered to as the British Islands is not because of some sort of imperialistic scheme hatched by the British government - it's because that's what people across the world have referred to the islands as for hundreds of years. Do you suggest that we write letters to all of these people and tell them not to, because it somehow, vaguelly, oppresses you?

Ok your actually annoying me. Please read my posts. I said I dont care either way and yet your talking to me in a condescending manner. It dosnt 'oppress me'. Dont be so stupid. I said I was explaining the 'practicalities' and inaccuracies of refering to our country as being part of a foreign block in a geopolitical sense.

Flex

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Well, if the "Germanic Plains" was a term that has been used far and wide for centuries to describe a geographical location, I'd have no problem with it whatsoever.

But you cant see why people would? Seems to me people who actually care about what the name is are the ones who think it should be changed.

Actually hey, are you going fight for the oppressed peoples of the Americas? I mean, how can they put up with those US bastards trying to claim the rest of the continents too!

Your analogy would only make sense if the USA actually called itself 'North America', after the continent it is a part of and which the Canadian people are also a part of or if the continent of North America was renamed the 'Canadian continent' or 'USA continent', etc.

Dont be at yourself

@Darkman2

Oh, sorry.

Well with regards to a being 'part of a foreign block in a geopolitical sense', I will say to you that there is no more political connotations with including Ireland under the term 'British Isles' as there is in including Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, United States, Canda etc under the term 'the Americas'. For me, it is exactly the same situation. It's not about geopolitical, it's purely geographical.

But anyway, you said you were explaining about the 'practicalities' (or presumably 'impracticalities') of such a naming convention - what were those again? What's this big problem that this has caused for the world that has got you all riled up?

Dont be at yourself

But you cant see why people would? Seems to me people who actually care about what the name is are the ones who think it should be changed.

No, I cant see why people would. I could see why they would, if, tomorrow Germany turned around and began referring to Poland as the Germanic Plains, but then that's a completely different situation.

Your analogy would only make sense if the USA actually called itself 'North America', after the continent it is a part of and which the Canadian people are also a part of or if the continent of North America was renamed the 'Canadian continent' or 'USA continent', etc.

My analogy seems pretty spot on if you ask me. On one side, we have the British Isles, which encompasses The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and The Republic of Ireland. On the other side, we have The Americas, which encompasses The United States of America as well as all the other South, Central and North American countries.

Flex

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

No, I cant see why people would. I could see why they would, if, tomorrow Germany turned around and began referring to Poland as the Germanic Plains, but then that's a completely different situation.

Different? How? Oh right; Poland was occupied by Germany and treated terribly by the Germans for a long time. Completely different to Britain and Ireland :rolleyes:

My analogy seems pretty spot on if you ask me. On one side, we have the British Isles, which encompasses The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and The Republic of Ireland. On the other side, we have The Americas, which encompasses The United States of America as well as all the other South, Central and North American countries.

No; you have the USA in the continent of North America. If the continent was called the 'Canadian continent' or 'USA continent', then you would. In Britain and Ireland, there are the British and the Irish peoples/nations. Under the current term, only one of those people gets acknowledgement as being indiginous to that archipeligo.

darkman2

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Oh, sorry.

Well with regards to a being 'part of a foreign block in a geopolitical sense', I will say to you that there is no more political connotations with including Ireland under the term 'British Isles' as there is in including Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, United States, Canda etc under the term 'the Americas'. For me, it is exactly the same situation. It's not about geopolitical, it's purely geographical.

But anyway, you said you were explaining about the 'practicalities' (or presumably 'impracticalities') of such a naming convention - what were those again? What's this big problem that this has caused for the world that has got you all riled up?

NP:) I reckon its one of two things or it could be a mix of both:

a) a lack of education on both the Britsh and Irish sides as to the implications of the term which is often, unintentionally overlooked. The term 'British Isle' to a foreign commentator would suggest that this entire island is in fact British. Understandably so IMO.

b) A slightly cynical throwback to the Empire that some of the Britsh themselves, particularly in the Middle classes are reluctant to let go of and an underlying, if rarley exposed, disregard for this country being a nation in its own right. Snobbery in a sense. Realistically if I were British id probrably act the same way.

Also I am comfortable with my nationality and do not have an inferiority complex like some Irish ppl certainly do have. So I dont care wether the British or anyone else try to, intentionally or otherwise, be it in casual conversation or at official level, try to undermine my nationality. Im proud of our acheivements as a country and it dosnt bother me.:D

TapouT

Flex wrote:

Hypothethical situation. If Poland was referred to as being part of some geographic designation like 'The Germanic Plains' or 'Greater Germany' and some Poles didnt like this term, what would you think?

Flex its pointless trying to get whats inside the heart of every true Irish man, woman and child to a West Brit.

Its like having heart and balls in a fight, some people just weren't born with them.

Good day.

aidan_walsh

Different? How? Oh right; Poland was occupied by Germany and treated terribly by the Germans for a long time. Completely different to Britain and Ireland

No, its different because tomorrow Germany won't turn around and start referring to Poland as part of the Germainc plains, just as Britian didn't with Ireland yesterday. Its a long standing tradition to include Ireland as part of the British Isles, whats the point of changing it? Save pissing off a Unionist of two...

No; you have the USA in the continent of North America. If the continent was called the 'Canadian continent' or 'USA continent', then you would. In Britain and Ireland, there are the British and the Irish peoples/nations. Under the current term, only one of those people gets acknowledgement as being indiginous to that archipeligo.

Ladies and gentlemen, the first graduate of the netwhizkid School of Politics, Logic, and Other Day-to-Day Stuff.

Gone West

I disagree with the term.
Same reasons as the others.

gandalf

Who cares its only a Geographical term !!

As for Pizza Hut, I am more pissed off that the last time I ate there I got the trotts !!! (and I mean it was the last time I will ever eat there, crap service and crap food!!)

TapouT

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

the reason that you see the islands refered to as the British Islands is not because of some sort of imperialistic scheme hatched by the British government - it's because that's what people across the world have referred to the islands as for hundreds of years.

And for those hundreds of years our British oppressors taught their colonies that we were in fact British, but thank god generations of Irish men and woman had the guts, the heart & passion to get up off their knee's and fight for an Ireland free from British rule and influence.

One final thought. If you want to refer to us as an isle, would 'The Emerald Isle' not do?.

Dont be at yourself

Flex wrote:

Different? How? Oh right; Poland was occupied by Germany and treated terribly by the Germans for a long time. Completely different to Britain and Ireland :rolleyes:

No, like I said, if Germany had refered to Poland as "the Germanic plains" for hundreds of years - as is the case of the British Isles usage - I'd have no problem with it. The different situation that I was referring to was one where Germany, tomorrow, announced that it would refer to central Europe as the Germanic Plains. Which, I'm sure, you can appreciate is different. And lets not drag this off topic quibbling over some hypothetical situation.

No; you have the USA in the continent of North America. If the continent was called the 'Canadian continent' or 'USA continent', then you would. In Britain and Ireland, there are the British and the Irish peoples/nations. Under the current term, only one of those people gets acknowledgement as being indiginous to that archipeligo.

OK, if you insist on ignoring my Americas example, it's just as easily applied to your North American one. So, you've got your collection of countries (North America vs British Isles), with one dominant country (United States of America vs United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), both of whom are commonly referred to with names that would allude to dominion over the collection of countries (America vs. Britain). How do they differ? Who dont the Canadians have a case, but the Irish do?

TapouT

TapouT wrote:

And for those hundreds of years our British oppressors taught their colonies that we were in fact British, but thank god generations of Irish men and woman had the guts, the heart & passion to get up off their knee's and fight for an Ireland free from British rule and influence.

Now where's my gun. Man I'm gonna go out and shoot me a few oppressors...

Dont be at yourself

NP I reckon its one of two things or it could be a mix of both:

a) a lack of education on both the Britsh and Irish sides as to the implications of the term which is often, unintentionally overlooked. The term 'British Isle' to a foreign commentator would suggest that this entire island is in fact British. Understandably so IMO.

Surely if this foreign commentator is going to be confused by British Isles, he's also going to be fooled by terms like North America or The Americas.

b) A slightly cynical throwback to the Empire that some of the Britsh themselves, particularly in the Middle classes are reluctant to let go of and an underlying, if rarley exposed, disregard for this country being a nation in its own right. Snobbery in a sense. Realistically if I were British id probrably act the same way.

Have you come into contact with many British people? In my experience, they couldn't give a toss about claiming Ireland as theirs (except in the occasional tour de france win!). I dont think there is an underlying disregard for the independence of the Republic.

Also I am comfortable with my nationality and do not have an inferiority complex like some Irish ppl certainly do have. So I dont care wether the British or anyone else try to, intentionally or otherwise, be it in casual conversation or at official level, try to undermine my nationality. Im proud of our acheivements as a country and it dosnt bother me.

I guess we're in agreement then, pretty much. Our only point of difference is that you'd see the British Isles as an attempt by somebody to undermine your nationality, whereas I see it as an age-old geographical term.

---

TapouT:

Look out your window. They're gone. They're not oppressing us anymore. And a final thought for you: Why not the British Isles? I mean, they do own that little corner of it up the top, you know.

snickerpuss

I realise its a geographic term but i do think it implies ownership.
That said i dont really care.

darkman2

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Surely if this foreign commentator is going to be confused by British Isles, he's also going to be fooled by terms like North America or The Americas.

This is true, however those nations are of course far far bigger then Ireland and therefore we are not on the same level in that respect. They are better recognisable political entities simply because of their size. We dont have that here. Were simply too small for that sort of recognition the world over. A minor point but it is relevant.

Dont be at yourself

But then if we're so small and unknown, surely being referred to as part of the British Isles also helps enlighten the ignorant as to where exactly we are in the world. It's swings and roundabouts really, the name may come with some political baggage, but it also serves it's purpose as a geographical descriptor better as a result too.

arbeitsscheuer

The British Isles is a geographical term, referring to our specific archipelago.
It is not a political one, and is therefore not subject to change.

Get over it.

blueshirt

Who really cares? Except some idiots living in the past with low self esteem. The gobsh**ts who opposed the opening of Croke park spring to mind.

Wertz

Couldn't give a f*ck, it's a collective term for a set of islands, it doesn't mean we';re under jurisdiction or the rule of the UK...
My main problem is the continual references to the city of Derry as Londonderry, but that's for a whole other thread

Dagnir Glaurung

I resent the term 'British Isles' about as much as I hate it when foreign people tell me I speak 'English'. I don't give a crap.