The Off Topic Topic

[Josquius]

Josq, surely it's not too difficult a point to concede that countries other than England have regional differences. Even if we reduce it to Europe only.

That's not a point to concede as its completely irrelevant to the point.
What is being disagreed with here is not that there are differences between different parts of basically every country (or every town even). That's so fucking obvious its ridiculous to think there could be disagreement.
Its that the north of England is more akin to Scotland than it is to the south of England thus rendering the concept of England in a cultural sense pretty pointless.

[Grey Fox]

Where, how & why does that matter?

How different is Scotland to England?

[crazy canuck]

Josq, surely it's not too difficult a point to concede that countries other than England have regional differences. Even if we reduce it to Europe only.

That's not a point to concede as its completely irrelevant to the point.
What is being disagreed with here is not that there are differences between different parts of basically every country (or every town even). That's so fucking obvious its ridiculous to think there could be disagreement.
Its that the north of England is more akin to Scotland than it is to the south of England thus rendering the concept of England in a cultural sense pretty pointless.

I don't understand.  If the north of England is more like the Scottish than the English, aren't you conceding that there is something called England as a cultural concept?

If not, what is the south of England culturally?

[Josquius]

Where, how & why does that matter?

How different is Scotland to England?

That's the point. Saying "British" would be a better solution in most circumstances. You won't find much that is common between the north and south that isn't also the case in Scotland- you will however find far more that is common between Scotland and the north.

I don't understand.  If the north of England is more like the Scottish than the English, aren't you conceding that there is something called English as a cultural concept?

England exists as a legal concept. There is a clear border that can be pointed to.
But if you're talking about differences between the people in the north and south of Britain that's not a very good place to draw your line, you'd be looking 200-250km further south.

If not, what is the south of England culturally?

Sexland :p

[crazy canuck]

People living in the South of Scotland are also different from Northern Scotland. A good argument for moving the border North?

[Grey Fox]

Where, how & why does that matter?

How different is Scotland to England?

That's the point. Saying "British" would be a better solution in most circumstances. You won't find much that is common between the north and south that isn't also the case in Scotland- you will however find far more that is common between Scotland and the north.

I think I finally understand what all of this is about.

No, all yous are England.

[Josquius]

People living in the South of Scotland are also different from Northern Scotland. A good argument for moving the border North?

Absolutely its often worth distinguishing the Highlands and Lowlands. It could be argued there's another border there and 'north Britain' is actually 'middle Britain'.
Though the Highlands does have a pretty low population, especially in the truly distinctive areas (see also Wales), so if one line is to be drawn its the Mersey-Humberish one.

[Sheilbh]

England is, with Denmark and Japan, probably the earliest "settled", stable, still surviving national identity in the world. There's been a state on basically the same borders as England now for the last 1,000 years (given, Berwick moves back and forth). I'm sorry but it's nonsense to claim there's no such thing or that it excludes or is exclusive of the north over really, really minor cultural differences that are really common around the world.

That's the point. Saying "British" would be a better solution in most circumstances. You won't find much that is common between the north and south that isn't also the case in Scotland- you will however find far more that is common between Scotland and the north.

No. As someone who grew up in Scotland the only thing more enraging watching the news than people saying Britain when they mean England is people saying England when they mean Britain.

Absolutely its often worth distinguishing the Highlands and Lowlands. It could be argued there's another border there and 'north Britain' is actually 'middle Britain'.

North Britons not hitherto associated with Scottish inclusive views

People living in the South of Scotland are also different from Northern Scotland. A good argument for moving the border North?

I'd actually split Scotland in three. Lowlands = basically English, Central Belt = urban, (post-)industrial, historic Irish/Catholic presence and still more diverse and the Highlands.

Although as I've mentioned before my parents were very involved in setting up Gaelic medium education in our part of the Highlands when I as a kid and there were regular outraged letters in the local press (John O'Groat Journal) about how Gaelic had never been spoken there as it was part of Norway until Margaret of Denmark married the Scottish king, so they should be setting up Norse medium education instead. So maybe in four

Edit: And not lost on me that the view from most of Scotland is that the bit of Scotland Jos would join the North onto is viewed as more or less English and the least "Scottish" bit of the country

[crazy canuck]

 

The only meaningful distinction I can add is that when I hitchhiked from London to the Highlands back in the mists of time, it was incredibly difficult to get a ride in the South.  It was really just transport trucks in the South, and each time the driver tried to convince me it was madness to go further North.  When I reached the Borders, it was easy to get a ride in private vehicles, and as I got into Scotland the driver was astonished to learn what I had done and that I had survived the South.