When is an Isle not an Island? When it's British, apparently:
"The expression "British Isles" is geographical and not political. They are a group of islands off the northwest coast of Europe consisting of Great Britain, the whole of Ireland, the Orkney and Shetland Islands, the Isle of Man, the Inner and Outer Hebrides, the Isle of Wight, the Scilly Islands, Lundy Island, the Channel Islands and many other smaller islands. A list of the main islands of Great Britain is to be found on another page on this site." See article.
Not political? Either they're extremely naive, or else the lady doth protest too much.
The stated justificationby a minority of British people (and their West British descendants and apologists in Ireland) for including Ireland as part of the "British Isles" is that, according to them, "British Isles" is a "geographical" term, not a political one. In that sense, so the argument runs, it's equivalent to a mere geographical or informal historical term such as “Scandinavia”. “Scandinavia” is not a political term, and the peoples of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark see nothing controversial in an informal umbrella term for their countries which reflects the shared history of their various countries. Further, the term British Isles is not unknown even in Ireland. And, if you want a trumped up trade-off, you’ll be reminded that the term "island of Ireland" is accepted even by Unionists as including Northern Ireland. Accordingly, so the argument runs, “British Isles” is a wholly uncontroversial, objective, purely geographical term.
Use of the term “British Isles” in Ireland
Irish people and British people use the term "British Isles" to mean different things. Since Britain comprises e.g., the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, it's possible to use the term in a non-patronising way. Irish people generally are bemused to learn that the Republic of Ireland could, for geographical or any other reasons, sensibly be described as "British":
"The British Isles is a British term used to identify the group of islands off the northwest coast of Europe consisting of Great Britain, Ireland and the many smaller adjacent islands. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it was first used by Peter Heylyn in Microcosmus in 1621. In Ireland the term is very controversial and thus avoided in normal conversation. It is officially avoided by the government of Ireland, and does not appear in any international treaties between the governments of Ireland and the United Kingdom." See article.
The “island of Ireland” term, contrasted
(Or the “ah-land of Ah-land”, as certain of the fruitier right-wing accents would put it). In contrast, using the term "island of Ireland" is politically anodyne, for two obvious reasons:
1. Even the official British name for that part of Ireland under British rule is "Northern Ireland". The official name for the South is the "Republic of Ireland". Since "Ireland" already occurs even in both official titles, it's unsurprising that someone referring to, for instance, a joint tourism initiative by the Northern and Southern Irish tourist boards will on occasion use the term “all-Ireland” or “island of Ireland” etc. In contrast, the term “British” is not in official state use anywhere in the Republic of Ireland.
Other meta-geographical terms, such as “Scandinavia”, contrasted
The term "Scandinavian", for instance, is not an official term that any Scandinavian country can lay sole official claim to. The term "Scandinavian" respects all Scandinavians by applying a new common adjective to all Scandinavian countries. This is distinguishable from the “British first” mindset behind the “British Isles” argument, a mindset that views as natural and right that one large country’s official territorial descriptor (“British”) should be applied, without consultation, to another state. I suspect it would be a different matter entirely if someone in Sweden started a web campaign to substitute "Greater Sweden" for "Scandinavia" and started describing other Nordic countries as "Swedish". Ditto "Iberia", "Oceania", etc.
Is the "British Isles" a non-political term?
Is that the daftest question in history? Calling Ireland British and claiming that that's "not political"?
They don’t think so: "The United Kingdom (UK) has also been called the British Isles or Great Britain at different times in history." See article.
Nor do they: The British Parliament accepts that the term, the "British Islands" is a political and territorial term, when in the 1978 Interpretation Act they stated that: "British Islands" means the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man."
Of course, our hair-splitting Greater British Islander friends will point out that the 1978 Act refers to "Islands" while they only use "Isles".
According to these logicians, “British Islands” - political; but “British Isles” - not political.
Have you ever seen a less convincing basis for outdated WASP condescension?
It's hard to know which is more deserving of contempt - the boorish lack of courtesy to a small nation or the sloppiness of the rationale. As an argument, it is worse than feeble. This is colonial emotion cannibalising logic and presenting the by products as an argument. If you tried to avoid a contractual obligation on a similar linguistic contrivance, you’d lose. It's a contrived distinction based on no effective difference. "Isles" and "Islands" are synonymous, even in British dictionaries. In any event, it's not the use of the term Isles/Islands that's the issue.
Why the neo-colonials carry on Kipling
There is a certain type of Kipling mindset, especially prevalent in Fifth Column South Dublin and in the Home Counties of England, that, having failed at military conquest, seek to re-energise the ongoing belitting of Ireland on a cultural and PR front. Behind all the decorum, they’re small-minded bigots, nothing more. They generally are reasonably positive about "Irish-ness", but only if it can be "civilised" by being "brought into the wider British cultural family". To this mindset, Ireland, independent or otherwise, is a mere province and too many reminders of its separateness is a metaphorical and in this case literal slight on the Greatness of Britain.
