May 18, 2009  

On their way to creating their British Empire, the English employed a number of strategies to control new citizens of their empire. They didn't create the strategies. Conquering nations for thousands of years had depended on these strategies to gain control of a people. I would say that the British perfected them while others, like US America, have copied them almost verbatim, although US America is not as subtle applying them.

First, get rid of the leaders
    Most people understand the importance of stage one. Get rid of the prominent leaders – the intelligent ones. Murder them, enslave them, expel them, bribe them or contrive situations where their own people no longer trust them and take matters into their own hands. This process makes it easier to destroy the social structure that sustains the people. Times may have changed a little – murders are not as blatant – but the strategies survive and thrive!
    When you get rid of the leaders and the intellectuals, the citizens lose their voice. (Has anybody really stopped to consider that in Central America, South America, Russia, China and Africa, newspaper editors and owners have been mysteriously murdered?)

The next step is to eliminate their language
Eliminating a nations language destroys traditions and identities. Language and customs are replaced by the invader's language, values, traditions and religion.
    In the case of the British Empire the conquered people could no longer use their own language, had to adopt English names, and worship English gods.
    In an effort to please their new masters, many were quick to accept these new names or new pronunciations of their former names. They also went to the master's churches.

Many sacrifice their heritage and their names
    To this day, ethnic names – along with their owner's heritage – are still being sacrificed in order to make the racists comfortable with their prejudice or ignorance.
    In the past, the inequity in these concessions to social harmony was that the English speaking audience usually was an uneducated bunch that – in the first place – had trouble with their own language. They still do.

To hear good English go to Wales or Ireland
    Visit the British Isles and you can witness that the conquered people -- the Gaelic peoples of Wales and Ireland – demonstrate a much better grasp of the English language in their day-to-day lives than their English counterparts.
    Yes, the English can boast of great authors and orators – but for sheer impact on their readers and listeners, follow the careers of the conquered – the Welsh and the Irish – and, for that matter, all of their conquered people. They do better with English than the English.
    Go to a pub in the poorer districts of those nations and you will be treated to a better use of the English language in the non-English pubs. And, of course, most of them can speak another language as well.
    Most English newspapers – not the London Times or the Guardian -- read by most of the population help perpetuate and sustain this ignorance of the “Queen's English” with writing that would fail to earn their writers a passing mark in Grade Eight English.
    In North America we are guilty of similar practices. Most analysts blame evolution of the language. Conspicuous in this evolution is the gradual disappearance of the adverb – you know, the word that usually ends in “ly”. Road signs that say “Drive Slow” are the most obvious offenders. There are thousands of others.

Teachers fail to set a good example
    In the meantime, North Americans may be concerned about the literacy of their students but they appear helpless to improve the situation. Heck, most of the teachers don't speak well, either. At the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta, more than 55% of their students at the Masters Level couldn't pass a standard Grade 12 English exam. Remember, these are our future teachers.
    When I taught in college, my chairman also conducted classes. He had a PhD in English from Michigan State University. He never used adverbs. When this was pointed out, his excuse was “the language is changing”. Meanwhile, these same advocates of change will mark their student's written work according to the rules of English that have been around for more than 100 years. They just don't speak it well. (Many of them would say “They just don't speak it good”)

Prejudice at work — even within my family
    One of the more scurrilous practices employed by the racially prejudiced occurs when they “mispronounce” your name on purpose. I have a simple name – Anton – and I can usually tell when some one is communicating their prejudice. They use it to call me Antin, Antwon, and Antonio. If I calmly correct them, few, if any, are apologetic. Several times I have been advised that, “they have trouble with foreign names!”
    The prejudice – or ignorance – doesn't stop with my first name. This time it is perpetuated by my own people. My last name – Kozlik, which means a male goat in Ukrainian – is pronounced COHZ LICK . The English prefer CAHZ LICK and most of my family avoided making waves and accepted this new pronunciation. Only one of my cousins fought to the end of his life to have his name pronounced properly. I liked him. He had principles.
   People tell me that I am too sensitive. I know they don't like me or my views or my atheism or my nationality and they are too chicken to say it, so, they get their point across by mispronouncing my name.
    I have noticed that most of those who would accuse a person of being too sensitive are actually insensitive and see no reason why they should change.

Just another delusion by the “Uncle Toms”
    Some people I know do not defend their names. Most often they are further fooled into thinking they have gained acceptance in the other guy's world. I maintain that if someone doesn't care to know how you pronounce your name, they don't care about you. And not protecting your name is the first stage of being under the control of others.
    If you don't care how they pronounce your name you defame your ancestors who fought for your right to be properly identified. You are helping the prejudiced practice their racism!
    The African-Americans of US America know what it means to label someone as an “Uncle Tom”. None of them want to be called an “Uncle Tom”. Allowing others to misuse your name is the same as being an “Uncle Tom”!
    I care how we pronounce each other's names. It is a sign of respect. I also care to live . . . without gods!  

                            Anton Kozlik
   

To view list of all posting that deal with prejudice, hate and racism, click here

Home       Comment Policy      Contact Us

        *Terms and            Definitions
My articles may contain words or phrases that may infer different meanings to different readers, or the reader may be unfamiliar with the term or its definition. I feel it is important to know what the writer meant when he used a word or term.

cognitive dissonance —
Filtering out information that conflicts with what one already believes, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce one’s beliefs.

Editors note: I will be repeating the “cognitive dissonance” definition for quite a while since it is practiced by so many — known by so few!