Britain was once a proud nation. A nation which had no need to assert its identity or reaffirm its notion of self. So pronounced was its self-confidence it didn't even bother to put its name on its stamps. Everyone knew Britain was great; that it was also green and pleasant was a bonus.
Yet now we are told that Britain is afflicted by an identity crisis. The meaning of Britishness is poorly understood and Mother Labour wants to teach us what it means (ah, if only Labour's Britain were my Britain!).
Truth be told, we would not be in this sorry mess had generations of loony lefties, at all levels of government, not embarked upon a decades long policy of Britain-bashing, in which Britain's legacy and achievements and its symbols and institutions were ignored, devalued and debased whilst ghettoised minority communitites were actively encouraged to celebrate and foster their own cultures and traditions, in their own languages. One cannot help but wonder whether there just might be a connection...
When one adds devolution, the rise of the European Union and the concomitant erosion of British sovereignty to the depressing mix, there is little wonder that some are dazed and confused.
To be fair, whilst Labour has not acknowledged that it is largely responsible for this lamentable state of affairs, it should be congratulated for finally realising that action must be taken; it is only a shame that its good intentions are so poorly directed.
According to two Labour Ministers, the solution to Britain's malaise is "Britain Day". Yes. I know, I know. My thoughts exactly.
Other countries have national days of celebration but these mark pivotal moments of nation-forging, be they days of independence (USA and many Commonwealth republics), revolution (France), discovery or first landing (Australia), federation or confederation (Canada), or the signing or coming-into-force of treaties or national constitutions (New Zealand and Poland).
One of the marked disadvantages of having the world's oldest and most stable democratic constitution and system of government (as Britain does) is that Britain doesn't have any great date upon which it can claim to have been born. We have no Phoenix moment. Ours is a story of relatively peaceful evolution. How civilised. How British.
The closest we can come to a birthday is the date of the Act of Union, yet we saw its tercentenary pass this year without a single catherine wheel or roman candle.
The date proposed by Labour ministers is the date of the State Opening of Parliament. Yawn! Only long-term residents of the Westminster Village would propose such an uninspiring date. It is safe, relatively PC and boring! The public is unlikely to connect with this in any real way.
If any "Britain Day" is to succeed it must be tied to an event or date which has great historic and popular appeal and that event should be central to the celebrations. The only dates that spring to mind are Battle of Britain Day (September 15), Trafalgar Day (October 21), or the old Empire Day (May 24, which is also Queen Victoria's birthday and is currently celebrated in Canada as "Victoria Day").
Of course, the great national days of other states are days of enormous pomp and pageantry: flags and bunting galore, fly pasts, fireworks, parades, concerts; a great smorgasbord of patriotic fervour, all designed to stiffen the sinews and reaffirm that ___________________ (insert name of country) is a splendid place.
Alas, what we have been offered is a day of local community initiatives....which sounds like a dull and very wet affair indeed. The real world equivalent would be for a tour guide to go to Heathrow airport to greet an enthusiastic first-time tourist, eager to see Britain's greatest and best, and then skip London completely, taking the poor soul to Milton Keynes or Basingstoke, before sending him back home.
The proposed Britain Day is an artificial creation that is doomed to fail. If the government seriously wants a national celebration of Britishness it should organise major events on Coronation Day or Queen Victoria's birthday. The Monarch is the ultimate symbol of our state and it is towards the Monarch that our national pride is traditionally directed. The anniversary of a monarch's birth or coronation is the appropriate time to celebrate Britain and all things British.
However, more important than any short-lived celebration, if the government wants to strengthen pride in Britain it must take proactive steps to instill British values in two critical groups: the young and immigrants.
The government should ensure that a portrait of The Queen is erected in the lobby of every state funded school, college and university and that the national anthem is reintroduced to school assemblies. It must make the study of British history compulsory through all levels of primary and secondary school and ensure that the history that is taught is balanced and unbiased.
The government must also ensure that British culture and values are never sacrificed or made to take a backseat to minority interests. New immigrants must enroll in civics classes that offer instruction on our culture and our history and, prior to receiving citizenship and in addition to an English-language test, these immigrants should, as in Canada, have to pass a test demonstrating comprehension of our national qualities and history.
The young, new immigrants and indeed many adult Britons, whilst enjoying a day off, will see no reason to attend a day long celebration of Britishness if they are not first taught what being British means. Let us not place the cart before the horse.
Reflections on St. George's Day by Rafe Heydel-Mankoo
“If I were not French, I would wish to be English”, said a Frenchman seeking to flatter Lord Palmerston.
“If I were not English, I would wish to be English”, replied His Lordship.
In the age of Pax Britannica, few Englishmen would have disagreed with with Queen Victoria ’s steely Prime Minister. Some might have wondered why he had bothered to state the obvious.
Palmerston’s England was self-assured and self-aware. The English knew they were blessed by God and by golly it was their duty to spread that blessing as far as they could, from the darkest corners of their own island to the farthest reaches of the globe. It mattered not one jot or tittle that no-one had actually requested their intercession.
It was true that the transmission of Albion ’s seed was to take place under a recently created “Union” flag, but everyone knew that the English called the shots. Johnny foreigner’s inability to distinguish between “ England ” and “ Britain ” was proof of this.
How remarkable then that the English nation today suffers Europe ’s greatest identity crisis. Whilst Estonians, Croats, Scots and Montenegrins gorge themselves on lavish portions of national bluster, the English patriot seeking sustenance from the state is left scavenging for scraps.
Europe ’s finest nation is lost and confused. It is surely the supreme irony that England ’s current malaise has been caused by its greatest creation: Britain . Does this mean that England ’s survival requires the destruction of the United Kingdom ?
As the protagonists in the British story, generations of Englishmen, secure in their identity, were happy to offer up their cherished ideals and values and have them woven into a new British national fabric. The creation of British symbols and institutions blurred the distinction between England and Britain ever further.
Elevation of Britishness above Englishness posed few problems whilst there were pink bits on the map and even the retreat from Empire failed to dent the Englishman’s devotion to the Union . But in Scotland and Wales the gradual weakening of British power caused many to question the continuing relevance of imperial symbols and institutions and even of the Union itself.
History tells us that where union between states is achieved, its foremost advocates will belong to the dominant state. The strong exert greatest influence, we all know that.
We also know that smaller states, fearing assimilation, are more likely to foster and maintain their pre-existing cultures and traditions. Whilst the English, Serbs and Prussians thought of themselves firstly as British, Yugoslav or German, the same could not be said for their junior partners (Scots, Bosnians, Bavarians). We find evidence of this in the New World as well: many American southerners belong to Dixie first and the USA second; in Canada the residents of Ontario , Canada ’s most powerful province, are the most likely to identify with nation before province.
As Scots and Welsh and Irish celebrate their rich cultural legacy and bask in their Celtic identity, dipping into the vast stores of tradition that earlier generations have preserved, the English appear bereft of culture and burdened by the guilt of what is perceived as a racist and imperialist past, thereby ensuring that any budding pride is well and truly nipped.
Such is the degree to which England and Britain are entwined in the public psyche that the major role played by the Scots in the expansion of Empire, and in its nefarious excesses, has been forgotten, obscured by the myth of Braveheart and the struggle against English oppression. It is the English alone who are to blame for Britain ’s past wrongs and whilst other inhabitants of these isles may celebrate their national pride with impunity, similar English expressions are attacked as racist.
One wonders what the rest of the United Kingdom was doing whilst England -- all alone apparently -- was busy rushing around colonizing, lopping hands off and stripping resources (to use their favourite trope).
The bizarre double-standard reached its apogee upon the election of Ken Livingstone as Mayor of England’s capital city. Shortly after attaining office Red Ken turned Green, allocating funds for a parade honouring St. Patrick but banning one in honour of St. George. The celebration of Englishness was deemed insensitive and divisive.
Ken has a point though, as any film buff will attest, the English tendency to evil is indisputable. Has anyone ever seen a Hollywood film where the villain did not speak RP?
Partly due to such negative stereotyping, supporters of Englishness have for many decades retreated to that which is cozy and unassertive: warm beer, bicycling vicars, picnicking in front of a car’s exhaust and watching belled and tassled fetishists bash each other with sticks. It is English Lite.
For many, to whom overt displays of patriotism are vulgar and decidedly un-English, this castrated hey nonny no has been sufficient. An Englishman’s pride was always serene and personal. And so it remained. And all was good.
However the English have finally awoken to the fact that patriotic fervour has enabled the other inhabitants of this island to accrue considerable benefits, often at English expense. And this offends that most sacred of English values: fair play.
The English did not object to the creation of a Scottish parliament or a Welsh assembly, neither have they raised a fuss over the issue of Scottish over-representation at Westminster ; but they object vehemently to those same Scottish MPs meddling in English domestic affairs, particularly when they secure the passage of English-only legislation which would otherwise have failed. That’s just not cricket.
As the wealthy partners in the Union the English did not mind giving the others a leg up, even if it meant that more money was spent per head in Scotland and Wales than in England .
But to see these subsidies lead to vast improvements in Scottish hospitals and schools whilst their English counterparts lay mired in squalor is simply not on. The English see their neighbours rewarded for throwing the rattle out of the pram.
Such clear injustices rankle, particularly when those whom the English subsidise add insult to injury by supporting which ever country opposes England on the playing field. That really is too much! Like a baited bear in a Southwark pit, England has been roused and is preparing to defend itself.
Drake’s drum may have yet to sound, but a renewed and invigorated England is reacquainting itself with its traditions, its culture and its symbols.
Where once the Union Jack greeted English teams, the St. George’s Cross now flutters. Content to sing God Save the Queen whilst the disloyal Welsh and Scots sang their own “national” anthems, the supporters of English sport are now contemplating Jerusalem . Once an activity of the quaint and eccentric, the exchange of St. George’s Day cards grows from year to year.
Such displays may stiffen the sinews, but they are meaningless without a proper appreciation of England ’s contributions to civilization.
To truly establish an English identity, its people must reclaim and celebrate as their own, those values and concepts which have become an established part of the British character: from tolerance, justice and the rule of law to the Monarchy, Parliament and the English language, each is as English as it is British.
Only then can England be said to have found itself.
© Rafe Heydel-Mankoo, 2007
