Saturday, 31 May 2008

A Denial of Identity with the National Cause

In the interests of "freedom of information" I publish the following to highlight the way in which the Welsh have been deprived of knowing of their history and have been fed a distorted view emanating from an English attempt to obliterate the culture, language and traditions of Wales. This has resulted in the existence of a section of the community which, through conditioning, has led to a reaction against Welsh identity and acceptance of the language and culture of Wales.
Sue Davies explains her blog :

I've started this blog as a small contribution to the struggle against the censorship that has disfigured my beloved Wales for many years.

I used to teach history at a school in Wales. I left long ago because the history I was expected to teach was mostly propaganda aimed at casting the English monarchy in the best light possible - and that meant telling packs of lies about Welsh history.

What brought matters to a head was a refusal to allow me to discuss with students research suggesting that Henry VIII, far from being someone to be admired and exhaulted, had executed tens of thousands of people for the heinious crime of dissent. Many of his victims were in Wales, where the Tudors (supposedly Welsh) were being criticised for not doing enough to end England's brutal grip on the Welsh.

My studies of Welsh history turned me into a staunch Welsh nationalist and republican. In fact I find it difficult to believe how anyone in Wales can have self-respect if they know Welsh history and remain a monarchist. The English monarchy's role in Wales is blood-drenched and stained with many atrocities, but you would hardly guess that from the history that has been taught many in Welsh schools.

I've always had a keen interest in current affairs and about seven years ago I started writing to the Welsh media - broadcast as well as newspapers - on all soirts of topics on a regular basis.

Sometimes my letters were published but often they were not. The omissions fell into a clear pattern - if the letter was non-controversial it would invariably be published (I'm not a bad letter-writer). But it was different with letters supporting Welsh nationalism or republicism or criticising the English monarchy. A few were printed, but most were not. Sometimes they would be edited beyoned belief. There were times when I barely recognised what I had written.

Tawdry baubles

About three years ago I persuaded a few fellow republicans to indulge in an unpleasnt excercise; namely to write some pro-monarchy letters to the newspapers. Every single one was printed verbatim.

It seems clear to me that the Welsh media - almost all of it owned, controlled and, largely, staffed from outside Wales - is determined not to allow any real debate about nationalism or republicism to get going.

It seems to me that many editors and media owners live in hope of some tawdry bauble from the much-discredited 'honours' system and are quite willing to do what is nessesary to 'earn' it. That, after all, is the real reason why the honours system is in place - to defend the monarchy from too much criticism.

So, why am I not in Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party? Well, I was for a short while but I quickly saw that the party wasn't much interested in Welsh independence (this was long before they actually admitted it publically) and had almost as many royalists as the Tory Party (one of the strong opponents of the monarchy I ever came across was a Tory Party activist in North Cardiff!).

I live in Whitchurch, Cardiff and hold a senior position in a pan-European venture that occasionally has me on the road to other countries.

I don't mind people challenging my views. I'm new to blogging so I'm not sure how easily it is for people to react. We'll see how it goes.



kerdasi amaq said...

You know this Lisbon Treaty?

In my view this amounts to the abolition of the Crown. What was that agreement between (was it) Edward I and the Welsh People, whereby his son became Prince of Wales?

In my opinion the Lisbon Treaty renders this agreement nugatory: as one party to the agreement(the English Crown) has ceased to exist, if that treaty is ratified.

Try that for size.

Alan in Dyfed said...

There is such a thing as hereditary cause or custom, despite the apparent
constitutional anomalies.
Treaties won't make much difference to de facto royalty.

kerdasi amaq said...

Yes, are you happy with this 'hereditary cause or custom'? If so, I'd say, that you have no right to demand independence for Wales and you're only option is to be a loyal lackey of the English Crown.

Have a look at the website EUreferendum.

Alan in Dyfed said...

These are the views of Sue Davies and not necessarily my own.
I am interested in the hereditary cause of the real princes of Wales.

kerdasi amaq said...

So, you can still answer the question yourself? It is your view that I'm interested in.

This is from eureferendum and sums up quite nicely Britain's real relationship with the European Union.

In Britain, we were told from the start that it was only an economic union which would entail no loss of sovereignty. That, she says, "was the very opposite of the truth. The dirty little secret is that, even without the constitution, political power has simply drained away from Westminster to Brussels."