On Feb 26, 7:09�pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Arthur Figgis wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
wrote:
(a) the *new name for the Imperial War Museum

National War Museum...

But which nation - or should the Commonwealth stuff go?

The British Museum do not seem to have had a problem with this!

and (b) the replacement for the Order of the British Empire?

Order of the British Nation.

Could that risk getting bogged down in the concept of a "nation" as a
"people", with its ethnic/linguistic connotations?

There are plenty of Nation or National this-that-and-the-others that don't
incur this problem; National Express, Test The Nation, National
Curriculum, Video Nation, Royal National Lifeboat Institution, National
Front, Terry Nation, etc. I don't think most people draw a distinction
between 'nation', 'state', and 'country'.

That said, i think 'Order of the British Nation' sounds a bit silly (and
as James observed, the acronym has already been taken by Private Eye!).
'Order of Britain' would, IMHO, be better.

It's not a problem with Empire, which is purely a bit anachronistic.

Not purely - it's also a painful reminder to some people. It's ever so
slightly like having a theme park in Germany called Himmlerspassland or
something.

Hey, is that Godwin's law i can hear kicking in? Does that mean this
thread's over?

More practically, if the honours were abolished or given a more
touchy-feely name, it would mean that the newspapers would have nothing
to moan about during the slow news period around the new year.

Do not underestimate the resourcefulness of journalists.

tom

--
They didn't have any answers - they just wanted weed and entitlement.

Tom,

To equate the British Empire in any way with Nazi Germany is an insult
to the millions who served the Empire, in war and peace, and whose
sense of duty ensured that, for example, India was united and governed
with the smallest per capita civil service ever heard of.

Why should one man's "painful reminder" outweigh another man's "proud
heritage"? I write as someone who is a descendant of one of the
"forced migrations" which the do-gooders might regard as a "painful
reminder" best avoided of which you write, but I do not see it that
way: if that had not happened, I would not be here today. There was
good and bad about the British Empire (as with all countries'
histories) but that is not a reason to erase its memory, or for those
of us who are actually proud of that history, and feel that we have
benefited from it, to feel ashamed of either fact.

So, would you also rename Trafalgar Square, Waterloo, Victoria, King
George and Canary Wharf and Canada Water Stations (and hundreds of
other place names) just because their origins might be questionable
"painful reminders" of our Imperial past?

Marc.