Secondly as regards the statement that the "Cornish people have always been distinct from the English" needs some qualification. Distinct in what way? And from which English?
I think my questions still remain really. Countries are legal entities, and Cornwall is not one. We can distinguish between for instance a French person and a German because they carry different passports. We can not do this of course with the Cornish. You are making a particular statement that the Cornish are distinguishable from the rest of the English, and I am asking whether you could qualify this. In what way are they distinguishable? Accent? Language usage? Skin colour? Religious beliefs? Genetic make up? And secondarily to this I am also asking if we are to separate out the Cornish from the English, does it make sense to define the English as a group? Are there not other similarly historical groupings within England?
And we aren't going away.
See for yourself [Monarchs of England and Great Britain]
Cornwall is an old place, just as is everywhere else on our wonderful Earth. Since mankind began migrating the place now known as Cornwall was probably known by many names, its borders changed and changed time and again, not just by humankind, but by natural forces.
Harking back to times past in good, but what makes Cornwall's recent history (16th century) any more worthy than say, (picks number semi randomly) 10 thousand BC? It isn't is it? Certainly the old way was before your time, your fathers time and your grand fathers time, so why make it a personal grudge? I don't hold it against the people of Brittany for invading our fair island all those years ago for the self same reason.
We all have many labels, here's mine: I'm first of all an Earthling, then English, then it's Surrey, then it's Croydon finally I am a Corbettis. Of course on any given day I might change this order, depending upon the situation. Being English doesn't make me exempt from being a Surreyite (or whatever we're called :-).
Your British citizenship doesn't stop you also being a Cornish person, does it?
And as for the EEC recognising the Cornish, well we are all intelegent to know that the EU's long term goal is to creat a superstate. If you think you have a friend in the EU/EEC then you are sadly mistaken, first it's the money, then it's the government, then it's national identity. Yes it'll take a time, but Cornwall's (and everywhere else in Europe's) independence looks certain to be a very short lived one. If things don't change the superstate will happen and we will all be European's, like it or not.
I do not agree;
it's because of the bigger european entity that the smaller identities (like the Cornish, Breton, Catelan, Frisian, Tirolean, Bavarian, Cananifate, etcetera) can flourish. The 'National' identities won't matter that much anymore, so in the end this discussion about cultures being submerged by the political dominant will become quite obsolete.
We will all be United States citizens ;-P
We are squeezed by the English on a number of fronts, many of which may seem trivial but which are crucial to us. The rewriting of Cornish history by English Heritage and their merry men, and a plethora of other Anglo-Saxon revisionists being a case in point.
When you go to Padstow, remember that it is not Padstow, nor even St Petrockstow, but Lanwennock. We have our own language and our own names for things and places and these have and are being anglicised out of existence. We are not pushing for a return to the past, we are staking our claim to a place in the future.
Your statistic about the "indigenous" population is an interesting one. Cornwall is not a country with either border controls, and no clear test of membership, so how can you define who is and is not "indigenous". Do you just mean "who were born in Cornwall", or "Whose parents were born in Cornwall" or what? In either of these cases the stats would probably just reflect the increasing population movements in Britain since the 60's.
The nationalist movements in Scotland, and Wales have similar problems. If for instance Scotland did succeed, how would be defined to be Scottish, and who not? Residency? Parentage?