Talk:Cornish emigration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

		This article falls within the scope of the the Cornwall Wikiproject, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. Contributions and new members welcome, you can edit the attached page, do a task from our to-do list, or visit the project page, and contribute to discussion.
		See drop down box for suggested article edit guidelines: Suggested article edit guidelines: Articles are written using a standard set of headings (see suggestions for article structure here. This is to maintain consistency between Cornwall articles and improve the quality of entries through a constant style of writing. These headings are, however, plastic and in state of flux and although we welcome suggestions or improvements, we would appreciate discussionbefore any major changes to the layout yourself. Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid is your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty! At the the Cornwall Wikiproject we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish self-government movement, etc) and should not flow over into other articles. Most of all have fun editing - thats the reason we all do this right?!

[edit] England

Cornish people moving to England are not 'emigrants'. They are migrants moving from one part of a country to another. Enzedbrit 23:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

EPF, that's better said but diaspora in another part of the same country just doesn't work. Cornwall is a part of England and the Cornish are also English. One is a subcategory of another. I believe that to call people descendended from Cornish living elsewhere in England feeds a Cornish nationalist agenda more than an educational one. Within the UK, identity of being from another part of the UK very quickly dilutes and you should know this too, unlike if they move abroad. You won't get someone in Yorkshire for example saying that "I'm half English and half Cornish" - unless they're 1/ American, 2/ Weird, 3/ Confused. Enzedbrit 00:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about that, but in any case it varies from person to person. One thing for sure is that the affiliations arent just based on regional identity for many people, either within or without the UK. The case of the Cornish is a peculiar one as is evidenced by our many discussions on the topic, however i'm sure there are as many Cornish elsewhere in the UK who do still connect with their roots as there are those who assimlate and have a more "diluted" identity (or just simply don't care). This can be seen according to some statistics on the "Cornish people" page anyway where there are some people in other English regions who still identify as "Cornish". Epf 03:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

For certain I think that we'll see this more common especially as groups like Mebyon Kernow make it attractive to identify as part of a Cornish ethnicity or race and break that off from being simply English or British. My grandfather was a Welsh speaker born in County Durham and never identified as a Welsh person but rather as a Geordie and my mother and siblings would never think of themselves as Welsh but Geordie, English and British. Had they been born in the United States or elsewhere then I'm certain being Welsh would have taken precedence. I would hate to see this as a sign of their time and now in Britain we identify as separate peoples even though we still live in the same country. If anything, I'd see this as a very sad eventuality and not something to be celebrated. Enzedbrit 05:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that it is silly to call Cornish people living in England emigrants, but are you can't seriously say that the Cornish are also English?! I'm not trying to say that Cornwall isn't a part of England, despite the historical situation, the way it is now is the way it is now! There is a difference between country and nation - you don't even have to have your own country to be a nation (look at the Jews, Kurds etc) and Cornwall is certainly culturally a nation. A lot of Cornish people would agree with my view here, and would never refer to themselves as English only Cornish and British. The Cornish separatists (i.e Cornish and not British) that you talk about are a minority of people in Cornwall, but as with loony minorities everywhere, they tend to have a loud voice! It seems strange to me that you think that this is sad - the UK, unlike some other countries, has never been a homogenous nation. It is this variation that makes the UK such a great place to live, and I think that we are stronger not weaker becasue of it. Mammal4 10:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am saying that the Cornish are also English as are Yorkshiremen, Cumbrians, Geordies, Kentishmen, Mercians, everyone. If people in Cornwall wish to refer to the Cornish as a nation, then they are entitled to do so, but Britain is a nation of nations, or better yet, of tribes. The Cornish are a British tribe. England even with its Saxon foundations is a nation of British tribes. I do think that it is sad that people are so separatist within Britain. Britain is very homogenous, far more so than most of Europe. The culture of Britain today varies little from the tip of the north to the tip of the south, as does the genetic disposition of its people, but that's by the by when it comes to national identity. I do seriously hold to it that someone who sees themself as Cornish and not in any way English is the sort of person with whom one would be best not to associate (and basing this too one one of my late mother's friend's husband who was nothing but Northumbrian and not at all English ... and quite a bit clueless as well). It is a strong agenda to advocate what Cornish nationalists are advocating. I see no shame in being British and I see no benefit to breaking up a country which has many benefits in being an island identity. Enzedbrit 03:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that we are broadly in agreement on this, but there are a few things that we don't agree on, which is fine (you seem to be a decent editor and not a troll - we don't have to agree on everything, that would be boring!). In your last post you seem to use England and Britain interchangably. This is a bit puzzling as I can see from your posts that you generally have a good grasp of the facts on this. I agree with you that Cornwall is part of England, but that does not make the Cornish also English as well. The Cornish are British though. I can't think of a single Cornish person that I know who would describe themselves as English, any more than a Welsh person would - it is in fact vaguely insulting if you are the sort to be easily offended. Most Cornish people I know are actually proud to be British though - the two aren't incompatable! I don't think the same would be true of the Yorkshiremen, Cumbrians, Geordies, Kentishmen etc that you mentionned. I have met a few people like your mother's friend's husband who are only Cornish and nothing else, but these are a serious minority. Unfortunately they all seem to find their way onto Wikipedia! Its makes me quite sad that you would think that you wouldn't want to associate with somebody who thought themselves Cornish but not English - most Cornish people do, but that doesn't make the a) xenophobic b) deluded c)pro Cornwall independence d) anti- English. I assume that you have met lots of Cornish people? I myself do not wish to see the breakup of the United Kingdom, but I equally don't want to see regional identity squashed in its maintainance. You are right that England is a nation of tribes but for whatever reason, maybe because it was conquered later that other independent kingdoms, maybe through isolation, people in Cornwall generally do not view themselves as English, only British.

I'm afraid that I don't agree that Britain is culturely homogenous, I think that there are clear differences between different parts of Britain, and one of those parts would be Cornwall. I see it in the way that people talk, the way that they socialise, the way that they interact with people from outside the region, traditions, music etc. This to me is part of what underpins a nation, This to me is not homogenous, but I don't think I will change your mind! As far a genetics go, I actually have some professional expertise in this matter and I can say with authority that there are no conclusive studies that can say one way or the other how homogenous Britain is, and if there were it is likley that the information could be interpreted in more than one way, such is the curse of statistics! The small number of studies that have been done are just that, small, and are generally flawed in some way from a scientific perspective (or not flawed, just that somebody with an axe has over interpreted the data). Take care Mammal4 13:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I do use England and Britain interchangeably but each usage has a purpose. When I am drawing on Britain as a whole, or restricting it to England, for example. The fact that Cornwall is part of England does make the Cornish English. That's how it works. To say that the Cornish aren’t English gives them some special status: on what does one base this? Why are the Cornish ‘special’ and unique and not any other county? Is it the percentage of residents in Cornwall who choose not to identify as English people opposed to those who do over a factor which means they have passed a certain threshold? I don’t deny that ‘you’ don’t know a single Cornish person who identifies as English, but I know that most will. The Cornish are no less English than any other group of English people. I don’t even recognise English as an ethnicity anymore than I do Cornish. I also can’t see that it’s vaguely insulting that I am offended, and it’s not easily offended. When one not only pulls, but mutilates, the fabric of ones culture, nation and identity and does it not based on fact but on pathetic petty nationalistic desires that seem fuelled more by American sentimentalism than any real desire for a genuine independence movement, I am greatly offended, although any fraction of what comes out of the Cornish nationalist movement is enough to offend. Also, Cornish identity might be more publicised, helped in no small way by Welsh nationalists, but there are very strong regional loyalties elsewhere in England. And Britain. What's more, not ‘most Cornish people do’ consider themselves Cornish and not English unless all the studies even produced on wikipedia are fake. I fear here that you are thus saying that to be Cornish one must fit certain criteria and that simply being resident in Cornwall isn’t enough or identifying with that county isn’t enough, whereas it would be in every other county. Therefore if you fly the English flag, don’t wish Cornish independence and don’t identify as a member of the Cornish ethnicity, then you aren’t Cornish, or really if you’re not the latter then you’re not a Cornish person. That’s not fair. As for regional identity, people who wish to see this pushed I think are missing the bigger picture. Greater autonomy for each of Britain’s regions (and I don't mean the baseless 'north' 'south' etc. that Blair's pushing for now), or dare I say it, England’s regions, will not do anything for employment, social values, progression, or the big issues, environmental protection, future planning, trade, scientific advancement, saving endangered species, but will lead to more demands from other areas, more conflict, because it never ceases. It never has and it never will and to think that it will is really wishful thinking – countries are created, amalgamated, broken up all the time – we have a great thing with the union. Sure, regions are suffering and there is too much control in London, but a Cornish assembly – and this is my focus at this point of my bit – would be totally unfair to every other English region or county and presumes too much about Cornish identity and blatantly ignores the desires of other places. Yes, I know Cornish people – I don’t know on my fingers nor can I compare them to the numbers you know. I do think that Britain is homogenous: we eat the same, dance the same, go to the pub the same, watch the same television, have the same humour, dress the same. Are you thinking the way we decorate our surf boards and the language of the songs we sing in church, or whether we have an eisteddfod or not? Those are important differences, but in the scheme of things, a very tiny percentage point of our daily life. I wouldn’t even look at the way we talk (dialect, accent) as differences, even though they are, because that’s a foregone conclusion. Although, I can’t see that we meet and socialise differently? Don’t the Cornish go to the bingo or is that only the rest of the country? The daily life of a person in Cornwall is far more intuned with someone in Aberdeen or Maidstone than it would be across the sea in Brittany. As for genetics, well, that’s never really something with which I’m comfortable ‘identifying with’ but I guess it is key, and if we think the British aren’t homogenous because of genetics, then we need only look at the genetic composite of other European nations to see that we are among the most homogenous in Europe and indeed many other countries too. We're all descended from the same people: the Britons, pre-Celtic, pre-Cornish and still the bulk of our genetic makeup. I will take care, thanks, you too! Enzedbrit 12:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Whoah...what did I do to deserve that? I've obviously pissed you off in some way, but I can't for the life of me (reading back through my edit) see how. You seem to have associated a whole lot of right wing opinions with me which I have never mentionned, nor do I agree with! You have also (correct me if I'm wrong) taken exception to the tone of my edit, especially finishing my text with take care? I finish a lot of my edits this way to provide emotive context. It is very hard to portray emotions in internet chat (or at least its very easy to take things the wrong way as the text is very dry). Some people use smiley faces to let the reader know how they are feeling about what they write, I use take care. It means that I think it is a friendly discussion, not a bitter rant. Anyway, this is getting extremely off topic for this page I may follow this up on your talk page if I have time later take care :) :) Mammal4 10:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, I'm just a nasty, bitter little resident committed homosexualist at times :( Enzedbrit 22:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Being an English person (Bristol born) who grew up in Cornwall, my experience is that most Cornish people DO regard themselves as distinct from the English (who are commonly referred to as 'foreigners'). Many Cornish people will refer to a move 'east of the Tamar' as 'emigrating'. There are significant tensions in parts of Cornwall between 'natives' and 'incomers', and there is also a very strong Cornish identification among those Cornish who have moved to England. --DuncanHill 10:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that when people refer to emigrating east of the Tamar, it is generally said tongue in cheek in the same way as the joke about passport control at the border is, but the point you make reamins true Mammal4 11:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cornish diaspora

Is emigration of people from Cornwall really called the Cornish Diaspora or is this someone's personal application of that term to this phenomenom? I haven't heard any emigration of people from the British isles referred to as a diaspora. The diaspora article states: The term diaspora (Ancient Greek διασπορά, "a scattering or sowing of seeds") is used (without capitalization) to refer to any people or ethnic population forced or induced to leave their traditional ethnic homelands; being dispersed throughout other parts of the world, and the ensuing developments in their dispersal and culture. Cornish people have never been forced to leave the country unless they were deported as any number of thousands of Britons were to the colonies. I think in many ways it is insulting to refer to emigration from Britain as a diaspora as that term seems more related to ethnic clensing or mass emigration due to natural events. I think this might be someone's attempt to make Cornish emigration sound dramatic or harrowsome when this isn't the case. I think that the same argument should apply to other British 'diasporas' too, such as eliminating Scottish diaspora. Does anyone agree? Should it be better kept simply to Cornish emigration or Emigration from Cornwall? Enzedbrit 03:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Its the first time I've heard it discribed that way. I suspect that it is not neutrally motivated, and an attempt to make the Cornish sound like victims of some evil ethnic cleansing or something. I vote to have it changed as suggested to Emmigration of Cornish Mammal4 13:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I would just go ahead and change this now if I were you - the call for comments that you put here and on the Cornish people page have been up for long enough and nobody (bar me) has said anything. Mammal4 08:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Um, I admit, I don't know how to do it :( I'll have to have a good read on the weekend.Enzedbrit 03:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Consider it done - have a nice weekend Mammal4 08:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

NB will need to slightly rewrite article to take new name into account as it still mentions diaspora Mammal4 08:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Numerous references to Cornish diaspora Perhaps if you care to Google 'Cornish diaspora' you will find numerous references to it. Professor Philip Payton, has written extensively on the Cornish Diaspora. UNESCO, whose acceptance of Cornish Mining as a World Heritage Site this week have acknowledged the Cornish Diaspora and the effect their expertise had upon the wider world. This BBC website acknowledges the Cornish diaspora - there are many more examples and the page should be left as it stands.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/legacies/immig_emig/england/cornwall/article_1.shtml

Well, call me thorough but one of the first things I generally do in such a situation is to google the terms-

Cornish diaspora [1] 1060 hits

Cornish emigration [2] 1290 hits

Even the bbc article that you've linked above uses the term Cornish emigration in the right hand links column.

Nobody is saying that this movement of people didn't happen as it undeniably did - its just about the terms used. This suggestion was here for several weeks without comment, which is why the change was made. More than happy to reopen the debate and discuss this further if you'd like (and change it back if that is what the consensus opinion is). Take care Mammal4 10:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Surely Cornish emigration is different to Cornish diaspora? Doesn't emigration refer to the act of emigrating from one place to live in another, whereas diaspora refers to the people who are already emigrants and their descendants? They are not synonyms. Alun 12:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I think dispora refers to the whole process, not just the people after they have left. Have a look at the definitions at diaspora and emigration. Both describe the act of emmigrating as well as downstream consequences. I think either term works just as well in this context its just a matter of which term people are most likley to be familiar with. Disapora is sometimes (but not always) used to describe people being forced against their will to leave an area, which is why I don't like its use here as it does not accurately describe the historic situation. Mammal4 13:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, OK, I'm not particularly bothered about the terminology one way or another. It could be that the term diaspora is being used by someone with a POV to push, so they are using it to imply some sort of coersion, in which case it should not be used, except in the context of citing it as a POV that some people hold to. I'd agree that the term emigration in this sense is more neutral. I also tend to be of the opinion that moving from Cornwall to another part of England (or the UK) doesn't constitute emigration. I moved from Cardiff in Wales to Kingston upon Hull in Yorkshire in 1994 (I'm Welsh) and didn't think of myself as emigrating. I now live in Finland and most certainly am an emigrant!!! Alun 18:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I see this is NOT in fact being currently discussed at Talk:Cornish emigration., it has hardly been discussed at all and it appears that a consensus of three people have decided to change the name, start deleting links and redirecting pages. The committee of three has decided that the Cornish diaspora of some 6-10 million people does not exist. May I refer you to Professor Philip Payton's books "Cornwall" and "The Cornish Overseas". The Cornish diaspora refers to Cornish emigrants and their descendants in countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Mexico. The diaspora was caused by a number of factors, but due mainly to economic reasons and the lack of jobs in the 18th and 19th centuries when many Cornish people or “Cousin Jacks” as they were known migrated to various parts of the world in search of a better life. Should this be deleted also ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_diaspora#The_Scottish_diaspora

We are having a debate over terminology, not about whether these people exist or not. Whether one uses the word diaspora or not is dependant upon the percieved impact of the word. I don't necessarily have a problem with the word myself, but I can see the point that diaspora can give the impression that some form of ethnic cleansing occured, which is just plaim wrong. Alun 18:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Diaspora: refer to any people or ethnic population forced or induced to leave their traditional ethnic homelands
• Emigration: Emigration is the act and the phenomenon of leaving one's native country to settle abroad. It is the same as immigration but from the perspective of the country of origin. Human movement before the establishment of state boundaries or within one state, is termed migration. Alun 18:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The comparison with the Scottish diaspora is erronious, as many of these were displaced people from the clearances whereas those Cornish migrated for economic reasons - its not the same! Mammal4 19:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

How about as a compromise that we leave something about diaspora in the article under its current title - something like "this has been termed by some a Cornish diaspora (insert reference), but whereas in other British diaspora such as the Irish and Scottish that were due mostly to displacement of people, the driving force in the Cornish emmigration was primarilty economic and led by demand for the unparralelled hard rock mining skills of Cornish tin miners" Mammal4 19:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redlinks

Could the person who renamed this page go and fix all the redlinks he/she has caused in other articles? --DuncanHill 10:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, you don't need to bother, I've recreated the Cornish diaspora page as a redirect to Cornish emigration - which fixes a load of redlinks. I also renamed this page without the full stop at the end, I think I've found and fixed relevant wikilinks. --DuncanHill 11:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - I renamed the page, but I replaced the diaspora page with a redirect here (as desribed in the wikipedia renaming pages section). Some other helpful person came through and deleted the diaspora page completely (why I do not know) causing the problem that you describe. Anyway, thanks for putting things back the righht way. take care Mammal4 11:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've put a message on the talk page of the person who deleted your redirect, explaining that I've recreated the redirect in order to fix redlinks in other articles.--DuncanHill 12:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

If one uses the move tab at the top of the page then it creates a redirect automatically, and the talk page is moved as well. Any links to redirect articles should be replaced with direct links. Alun 16:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thats what I did originally - the problem is that another user came through and deleted the diaspora page so there was nothing to redirect from casuing the red links. Anyway its fixed now ;) Mammal4 09:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)