When I opened the Immigration thread, I found these opinions:

Quote: Justin of Oz

QUOTE

they send hundreds of millions of dollars, or pounds or whatever, out of this country, and add it to the economy of their country. This has the effect of raising their country up from the status of poverty and sooner or later, they will equal us. Isn’t equality what we are chasing here?

Quote: Liz

QUOTE

they send money back to their families who are very poor and live a substandard life where theyre from. our economy needs them. those who complain are the ones already abusing the system.

Quote: Mark

QUOTE

Just because the British were fortunate to be born into a country experiencing a period of wealth and prosperity doesnt give them the right to deny the level of existence they inherrited from others.

Quote: Liz

QUOTE

he claims there no brits who can do the jobs he expects and he waits anxiously for his friends back home in poland to join him in the uk after 1stmay when the country

Quote: miguel

QUOTE

Some Estonians can speak up to four languages and are very skilled with their hands. At a time when these ex-soviet block countries are trying to build their economies, the outflow of educated skilled job-seekers will haven a negative reverse effect on these developing countries and could hinder their economic progress.

Gentlemen! You have all got it wrong. Have you noticed that generally wherever the nation is English, there is prosperity?

And again, the definition of prosperity does not have a same meaning everywhere. For, the prosperity of England in different from that of Japan, the latter is just a shallow understanding.

With wrong social programs, negative social, political and economic affects would come!

I do not want to say too much here, but kindly read a paragraph from my own book on the alien affect. The affect described here is actually connected to the affect of languages:

QUOTE

The threat: When one thinks of the jobs in the English nations, I may say that all jobs would be cornered by persons from outside. But if one thinks that this is a good thing, for the nation gains from cheap labour, then they have not understood the real danger, implicit in this development.

Along with labourers, would come their lower stature social culture, connections, and communications. Their very demeanour, anthropological features, and also their gestures would speak it out loudly. And they would make a mess of the society of the English nations. Many native workers would simply leave their field of activity and seek out other avenues, leaving the field with more vacancies. It would be just a vicious chain reaction, which would garner more strength as more and more immigrants come. The immigrants who come with English and an innate understanding of its social philosophies would not create much problems on their own, but when a mass of immigrants with feudal social understandings converge on a specific profession then that field of activity is as good as lost for the English native. For, he or she won’t be able to bear his social identification with them or maintain his equanimity. Now it is the nursing profession; many others are in the offing. School teaching, taxi driving, computer-based work, like that, slowly the native English speaker stands to lose his bastions one by one. And then the general comment that the English are a group of lazy, egoistic, snobbish race would come about

Already I have started hearing such comments.

Gentlemen, there is a grave danger, that you people are sponsoring a phenomena about which you have no idea at all.

Here my aim is not to say that the average Englishman is of a better ethical or moral standard than his counterpart elsewhere, but of the fact that the systems, that he carries in his mind, has a rare element of grace, and beauty. What is needed is that this should be allowed to spread to the rest of the world, and not the reverse to happen, wherein the Englishman starts reacting to alien cultural reactions, which come embedded in alien languages.

I do not want to seem to be lecturing to you people: Yet, let me tell you, what is the ‘minutest’ of difference between the native English speaking crowd, and the others:

Suppose a group of say, qualified Engineers and few others, of again any feudal language nativity are standing together, speaking in a common vernacular. And in a different corner, are standing a group of ordinary native English speaking persons (here I am not specifying their nationality or colour).

By shallow modern standards of evaluation, the feudal language crowd would be of more intelligence, and all their levels of knowledge would be better, in comparison with the other group.

But then, in an informal setting it would be found that the English crowd would be seen to be displaying more group intelligence. And resourcefulness. Why?

This is due to the fact that the English individual, when he wants an information, would find no mental or social block in asking for it; while each member in the other crowd would be hampered in asking for information or guidance, by the social factor of respect and disdain, that runs like a creeping creature through their social intelligence; and which takes control of all actions and reactions.

Yet, in the feudal language group, there is a very tangible social power, that exudes from the dominant persons on anyone who chance to find themselves in the lower rung.

I am still sure that you people still would find it difficult get the gist of what I tried to convey!!

Posted on 30th July 2004

I deeply regret the reaction that I have created.

I need to explain. The quotation is from a book, which comes with a lot of other arguments, and the quoted part, when taken out of the string of arguments does seem very rude, indeed. I do not feel slighted by Sledgehead’s sharp comments on me, and I do not feel that Tony should edit the same.

Actually what I wanted to bring to attention was not on the different races, or that non-English persons are in way genetically unfit or common or subservient. And I do not feel that the English citizen is born superior in any sense. But I do feel that he does grow in a very uncommonly common atmosphere. For, this common atmosphere is not a common thing in many places in the world.

I am not an empty campaign. I do have an understanding that there is an essentially vibrant difference in English, which does not actually require a lot evidence to substantiate, for the colonial history is evidence enough. For, if anyone thinks that the history of British colonialism is the history of the march of the British army, then it is wrong.

For, even in India, the colonial empire was won not by the British army, but mostly by the Indian soldiers, under fighting under British systems, and winning over Indian soldiery fighting under Indian systems.

What I did want to say was that there is an element of persons existing in different mental levels in feudal languages; and when one gets stuck with them, then that level inflicts the other. Either superior or inferior, it does create a malevolent mental aura in a person. To understand this, just remember the colonial officials who came back to England after years in nations colonies. They definitely did display the feudal aura that they had come to infect them.

Now, what is this feudalism in languages that I am harping on? It is a very big theme, yet may I try to explain. The term ‘feudal languages’ is a term I use, to define a definite pattern I saw in certain languages. That is, in these languages, there are different levels of words for different levels of persons, as understood by the speaker. And, as such the speaker has a power over another person, who can rightfully be monitored and measured in a most obvious manner. And it does really create a social fright, and in my opinion is the real reason for many social phenomena like caste, and so many other things.

Now, what I did want to say was that this book you mentioned of mine, was actually first written in a small form in 1989. But as you said, no publisher would touch it for it is of a very strange theme. But, I have my own conviction that what I have observed is true, and I have seen immense social incidence that all does confirm my beliefs.

As for my grammar, I hope you can forgive me, for I am not a formally qualified in English, and I wouldn’t want to spoil English.

I really do use a lot of words, for I think it is a necessary thing, for I have dealt about a theme, which is not in English.

As for the outsider who comes into English nations, my contention is that they should not bring in the feudalism that exists in their languages, over there; if it allowed, then it is the same native situation over there again. And, it is only a nice thing to see that what is good over there is preserved.

About the job issue, it is not really my concern whether English citizens lose their jobs or not; but what does disturb me, is that if the same feudal languages do take over the English systems, it can do a lot of harm to the world. But then, you may argue that the English nations have exploited the world; well, it is just a perspective, which can be viewed from various angles.

And before closing, I would really put in my argument that many nations or at least a majority of their citizens, who exist in the lower rung of their national languages, would profit, if they replaced their own languages by pure, perfect Britisah English. But, isn’t that wishful thinking?

Posted on 31 July 2004

Quote:Sledgehead

Far from being pure, English is corrupted almost every day so as to better serve its users. In this way it stays relevant. Recently words like schmoe (yiddish), latte (Italian) and pucka (Indian) have all been found to be useful adjuncts to English and have been absorbed

Actually, what I am talking about has nothing to do with the themes you have discussed. I do not dispute any of the things you have said. But what I have tried to point out is something very different, and the fact that it still is not understood is in itself a proof of the danger it presents.

I will try to explain in a very brief manner here. In English, when two people speak, the words they use to each other does not contain specific words to signify the relative social level of one to the other, and to the others around. In feudal languages, all communication is connected to this factor. For, even a simple dialogue in English like: Where are you going? Or Where is he going? Has to be asked in a variety of words, each signifying a different social level, or at least relative level of hierarchy. This factor is beyond the imagination of English speaking people.

My themes are related to the social disturbances and mental irritations, this can bring in to all concerned, and their long term affects.

You spoke about USA; well, I would contend that the only difference that USA has from the South American nations is that it is English, and when a time comes when it becomes Spanish, Hindi, Chinese, and so many other languages, the USA as we now know it would be just a legend.

I think I need to clarify more; my book is not about race relationships in English nations. Actually, it is not even about English nations, but about my own conviction that languages do have a very prominent role in designing many, many factors connected to human social behaviour.

But then, I can’t just dwell in the realm of theories, and need to comedown to areas, where one can find the working of my understanding, and also, the working of the languages.

Talking about feudalism in languages, I need to say that in feudal languages, individuals in the society are connected by unsee-able strings that are actually links, to many, varying levels of social levels, and mental status. One is burdened by these strings, and it is very much difficult to escape their clutches in an ordinary man’s lifetime, unless he is endowed with a bit of uncommon luck.

When one gets born in an English nation, one is born lucky to have a communication software, which is with a very, very positive connotation. (Here I must insist that there might be other languages of quality similar to English. I have a feeling that Dutch may have some level of similarity in this sense, but I do not know much about this language).

The difference it makes on a nation’s, a society’s, and an individual’s life is there to see. Even in the anthropological features.

In India, one can find a wide range of anthropological expressions, and each can be very much connected to the particular level an individual exists in his language. This type of definitions cannot be given in modern English as spoken in English nations.

There are many castes in India; each uses very derogatory terms about the subordinate ones, in the seclusions of their house and acquaintances. And have well defined separate words, manners, and attitudes to use to different levels of people. When I say this, what comes into your thoughts will be an entirely different scene; which has no connection with a social scene that cannot be replicated in English.

And do not feel that I am denigrating any non-English being, for in many non-English nations, these very person who, you may feel, I am seeing with disdain, do practice the vile art of seeing individuals with a very malicious evaluating eye, that can really cripple a man’s individuality. Everyman naturally becomes guilty of this, by just thinking and interacting in the feudal languages.

When you see the terrible poverty in many nations, and also see that in spite of all these problems, they cannot unite, but only fight, you may feel that they are mad. The reality is not that. They are all reacting in a vile communication (software) program. And, do not feel that the English people are genetically immune to this character; no, if you all also start reacting to the same communication systems, you will also start doing so.

My book is connected to these theme, and it is not just pure theory; but more of illustrations from a variety of human experiences.

And this book does go into infinite social themes and scenes. And many would be very provocative, not because it is my aim, but because it has to reach beyond the confines of socially acceptable dialogues.

If it is denigration one finds in my book, then a lot of people in this world should feel it, for it can agitate the Chinese, the French, the Germans, the Indians, and many others, if they want to get agitated. Yet, I feel that if taken with the right understanding, it can save them, for I am opening the secret of the English, that made them the masters of the World, not with the power of the arms, but by a new definition of mental superiority, that stands in sharp contrast to the well understood feeling that mental superiority is connected to one’s collection of information in one’s head.

My grammar may be wrong, and my words may seem ill-fitting, I will not argue; but I will stand by my convictions, and also by my contentions.

I will quote another line from my book: I do not know whether it will agitate the South Americans; I must admit that I tend to use very extreme themes. It comes in the very introductory areas.

QUOTE

Yet, if one observes, one can clearly discern it. To use a blunt illustration, I can say this: In many South American* countries, when a certain number of persons, from certain pre-definable social or intellectual levels, interact for sometime in close quarters, there would develop deep animosity among them, possibly leading to violence.

I apologise for the number of words. Could I have said the whole thing in a few sentences?