If we radiate no sense of pride, no community of identity, we make it much harder for settlers to want to belong. If we deride and traduce the concept of patriotism, if we teach that the nation-state is finished, if we affect to believe that British history was a hateful chronicle of racism and exploitation, if we insist that we’re all Europeans now, we can hardly be surprised if people – whether long-settled or the children of immigrants – begin to cast around for alternative identities.
He does have a point. What values do we have as a society? We seem to have abandoned our belief in the concept of family, caring for the elderly, or the value of education, or any sort of work ethos.
Well, some of us haven’t, but should one believe all that is written in the popular press, one may be forgiven for thinking so. The British are extraordinarily good at self-criticism, but perhaps it is time to fly the flag. We should perhaps portray our society as one worth joining, and not just perhaps, for our over generous and unaffordable benefits.
Boadicea's Chariot 
It is a pity that Daniel Hannan isn’t an MP, rather than MEP.
His speeches are always worth listening to…
Ah, yes, I agree with you, CWJ.
He had his moment of fame, which I think came as a big shock, but he would be better employed in Westminster, I agree.
OK, you can all groan, but this is one area where Australia is nothing like the UK, thank goodness. Our recent Australia Day shows that. Australia has a keen sense of identity, and people are still proud to be Australian (hence the push for the final independence of a republic). Most of our immigrants are very willing to integrate, and overjoyed when they receive the piece of paper that makes them formally one of us. That’s what they came here for.
But even here we are now getting some stupid left-wing academics (I’ve translated that from the original Strine because I know it offends some of you) shouting that we shouldn’t wave our flags and shouldn’t be proud of being a thrusting young nation … because we treated the abos so badly … and so on.
Excuse me, we didn’t. There’s no-one alive today who was associated with crimes committed 100 or 200 years ago. Worth remembering that in the UK, too. 🙂
Evening, Bearsy.
I would suggest that Australia indeed does have a keen sense of identity, but so did we! Our immigrants were, and some undoubtedly still are, proud to own a British passport.
Where has it gone?
It is indeed!
I think it’s a little more than simply abandoning a ‘belief in the concept of family, caring for the elderly, or the value of education, or any sort of work ethos.’ All those attitudes come from the Government inspired idea that everyone can be ‘free’ to do what they like, without moral judgement and that someone else will pick up the pieces. A bit of Government inspired ‘no rights without responsibility’ might go a way to improve that.
I think it’s time to take the writing of history out of the hands of the ‘poor, oppressed minorities’, which has led to the idea that ‘British history was a hateful chronicle of racism and exploitation’.
There is much to be proud of in Britain’s history … and pride is what is, indeed, lacking. Perhaps, a more ‘balanced’ and ‘inclusive’ tale of Britain would encourage more people to be proud of their heritage rather than to denigrate it.
Well said, Boadicea.
There is a distinct difference between seeing the past through rose-tinted spectacles and feeling that our heritage and history renders our society worthless and guilt-ridden.
I also think it well time to withdraw ‘concessions’ to anyone who believes they have a claim to be excluded from the customs and laws of the land.
Now, I don’t just mean religious groups who get the laws waived in regard of wearing crash-helmets or insisting that everyone has to eat halal food… I also mean those who want ‘positive discrimination’ for their ‘historical underprivileged and oppressed’ position in society. Allowing all these ‘special interest’ groups special treatment simply fragments society – when what is needed is some form of communal and inclusive identity.
Long comment deleted for the sake of Chariot harmony. I have left one anodyne remark.
Britain has no pride or sense of identity because those attributes are “politically incorrect”.
Why are such sentiments deemed “politically incorrect”, Bearsy?
I would have thought the reverse to be true.
If you could respond whilst preserving Chariot harmony, that is. 😉
Boadicea.
Your comment #7; I’m thinking about it.
I know the original idea was to be ‘inclusive’ – to bring into society those who felt they were, by reason of gender, sexual preference, colour, or faith, ‘excluded’. And I have no wish to see the ‘discrimination’ laws repealed.
But, and this is my main objection – the determination of ‘special cases’ to waive laws, customs and to discriminate against those who don’t fit into any of the above categories (which is what positive discrimination is) has, in fact, left the majority feeling, with some justification, that there are a whole raft of tails wagging one very disempowered dog.
Very briefly, because it’s late here; I’m thinking about the basic balance between the rule of the majority and the essential protection for minorities.
Tricky, but necessary, but yes, it can go too far the other way, which I think is your basic objection, but I have just read your comments swiftly.
I will re-read tomorrow.
You tell me, Araminta.
In the UK, I would be cautioned and possibly imprisoned for speaking out against young thugs terrorising old people in what used to be a quintessentially quiet English country town; for decrying the sexual deviants who successfully prosecuted a Christian pair for refusing to accept them into their home; for warning of the dangers of the hegemonising virus of Islam.
Principles and standards that I was brought up to honour are now dismissed with contempt, in your country.
You tell me, Araminta.
The year 2006 marked an important event in Germany’s history. The World Cup served as an unofficial turning-of-the-page ceremony. Germany is no longer bogged down by war guilt, nor is Germany afraid to make it quite clear which culture is Germany’s and which cultures must adhere to that culture and its norms and values. (Here’s a hint: it’s German) The UK, especially England, has managed to muddle through virtually everything that has faced it in its history — even the formation of the British Empire was a muddle. Perhaps this has come in helpful many times in British history (the Via Media comes to mind), but perhaps the occasional stand for something would be nice? What Britain needs is not a revolution or a radical government — Britons are terrible revolutionaries and radicalism simply isn’t something the British do. Perhaps, more than anything, a British version of the 2006 World Cup is needed — something which ends self-flagellating nonsense. Perhaps the 2012 Olympics will do that.
One way of approaching this is teaching everything on context. Were the British always “nice” to the Indians? No, but the British DID eventually get Hindu women to stop jumping into funeral pyres and they at least tried to do something with female infanticide. The British also built a great deal of infrastructure and Indian society was not universally opposed to Britain’s presence at all periods during the Raj. Were the British always nice to the Chinese? No, but then again, the Chinese were usually worse to each other and were not always that kind to their neighbours. Only a particular archipelago off the Korean coast was able to fend off Chinese dominance. The vast majority of Hongkongers were also content with British rule, many having left with the British. Even those who returned and remain will often admit, albeit quietly and reluctantly out of fear of eventual Chinese repercussions, that the British were far better as overlords. The British were also able to keep some sort of order in their African colonies. The good must be taught with the bad, the right must be taught along with the wrong. It is probably best to avoid a US-style white-wash and over-glorification of the self.
My point precisely, Christopher. A balanced view – not self-flagellating, not self-congratulating and not white-washing.
“If we insist that we’re all Europeans now, we can hardly be surprised if ……”
Sorry, but the one thing a wog can pick up straight away is racism 😦
Assimilation does not begin by telling immigrants that one thing is better than another, it comes by making them understand that everybody is equal, the nation just makes that equality stronger.
Good try anyway, might get it right in another 20 years.
What racism, Donald? Load of cobblers, mate. 😕
Donald
You see racism where there is none. And you have missed the point of this post completely. There is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone celebrating their own history, culture and identity in the land where that history, culture and identity is native.
What is wrong is for those who come from other places to insist that their history, culture and identity are of equal worth to and should replace that of their host country. That applies in the UK just as it does here. We already have pockets of Australia where people believe they have the right to ignore Australian customs and laws. That is not assimilation, that is segregation and the fragmenting of society. And from what I’ve read of you – you are not in favour of people demanding that their laws and customs should prevail over those of this country. You are proud of your heritage, but you don’t expect the laws and customs of Australia to be waived and changed to those of your birth country – any more than I expect them to be changed to fit in with my English background.
I was absolutely furious when my daughters were to be taught only Caribbean history – they were English living in England. I would have been equally furious if my grandson had been taught only English history here – he may have been born in England but he was educated here in Oz.
You are mixing two entirely different things – equality of culture and equality of the individual. There is a difference. One cannot possibly hope to have a united society if different groups are allowed to pick and choose which customs and laws they will abide by and which they won’t. It must be made absolutely clear that if one comes to a country (be it here, the UK, France, Germany, or Indonesia) that the only acceptable culture is that of the host country and that any ‘imported’ culture is and must be subservient to the host culture.
That does not mean any individual should be treated as inferiors. According equal respect to the individual is quite different from according equal respect to cultures, especially where those cultures are inimical to that of the prevailing mores.
Is it any surprise that some people have an identity crisis in this country when politicians, do gooders, string vest wearing tree huggers with sandels knitted out of All Bran spen every waking moment telling us to be ashamed of being British?
Do you remember when blair apologised to the people who are not white for the slave trade. How far do people like this want to go back? When will the Italian Government say sorry for invading our shores in 55BC and enslaving some of our ancestors?
And who ever said that we as a Nation will live happily side by side by anyone who fancies turning up, for Petes sake it was not that long ago when I used to attend Church Parade in the Army to hear, ‘Jews and Roman Catholics fall out,’ how’s that for ‘integration.’
But as a whole, we as a nation are fairly content to get along with most folk and ay, there lies the rub. The old saying, ‘give an inch and take a mile,’ is very apt here, we have become known as a soft touch, ‘live and let live’ is our motto but perhaps we should add ‘but under our rules, mores and laws. That speech could be the making of Cameron provided it is followed up by firm and concerted action and he could do no worse than insisting that ALL schools start the day by having a Christian service and swearing allegiance to The Country, The Queen and The Flag.
Rant over.
Good on ya’, OMG; telling it like it is. 🙂
Bearsy. Your comments #13.
I doubt very much you would imprisoned or cautioned for speaking out on the subject of thugs terrorising old people, Bearsy. Yes, it does happen, but I do wonder how widespread this is in the average English market town or village. It seems to me to be more to do with inadequate policing, the booze and drugs culture and etc. and the wider reportage of such incidents.
“Sexual deviants” well that term would quite rightly be deemed offensive and we do have anti-discrimination laws which prohibit such terminology. Regarding the particular case you mention though, I think it was absolutely ridiculous that it ever came to court, although it would appear that B&B accommodation is now subject to legislation which made a judgment against the Christian couple inevitable.
No comment on the “virus of Islam”, but smiled at ” hegemonising “!
Principles and standards are not dismissed with contempt here. They are the same principles and standards with which I grew up too, and did my best to pass on to my children.
Trying to catch up with this, but thanks Boadicea; you are doing a grand job! 🙂
Nice rant, OMG. 🙂
I can’t see any racism here, Donald!
I’m not European, I’m English.
Racism doesn’t just mean to hate another people, race or culture; it also means trying to stay apart while others wish to join to make things better.
The days of race and culture are over. This is the 21st Century, a time when all people should realise that borders are on their way out and all earth shall intermix. Trying to stay within one culture or race is wrong, trying to maintain one’s culture is wrong, keep your traditions but get ready for Ham Kebabs and curried rice with beef and fish and chips all on one plate, all for one and one for all. Unavoidable!! 🙂
Donald.
You are interpreting “racism” in a way that beats even my somewhat liberal definition, but Bearsy will have none of it. 🙂
I’m not really too keen on your lack of borders stuff; we want more of them! 😉
Christopher you sound very much as if you have been reading ‘Empire’, by Niall Ferguson. I say that because I have just done so and your comments ring a bell. For those of you who have not read it, I urge you to do so. It puts the rise and fall of the British Empire into perspective.
Britain is going through an era of self-discovery. It is having to reinvent itself. It is no longer the great power it once was. While there is plenty from the past for Britons to be immensely proud about, there is not a great deal now that makes the country special. Proclaiming to the world that we once had the biggest Empire ever known falls a bit flat when juxtaposed with the reality of how low we have sunk. Its a bit like soccer fans chanting about World Cup victory in 1966. England has won nothing since.
I suspect that many of those who deride Britain’s past do so because they want a clean break from the burden of our history. We can proclaim as loudly as we want how much good British Imperialism did for the world, but nobody, not the Europeans, not the Africans, not the Indians and certainly not the Americans want to hear it or admit that Britain gave to much of the world such concepts as liberal capitalism, free trade and parliamentary democracy, amongst much else including the abolition of slavery.
Britain sacrificed the Empire when it fought two world wars against nations and empire builders that were fundamentally evil and would have inflicted more harm upon their subjects than Britain ever did. All that is forgotten or ignored. In the words of Sir Richard Turnbull, penultimate governor of Aden, “When the British Empire finally sank beneath the waves of history it would leave behind it only two monuments. The game of Association Football and the expression, ‘Fcuk off'”. Even there he is possibly wrong. I wonder how many people outside of England know where ‘Soccer’ originated.
We tend to look upon the period in which we live as being particularly significant in the history of a nation. Understandably so. But the reality is we are just chapters in a book. History went on before we arrived and it will go on after we have gone. There is little point stressing too much about it. Given what we know now, what aspects of our history would we change? Should we appeased Hitler as urged by Gandhi, of all people, and hung on to our empire? Should we have left Belgium to the mercies of the Kaiser and kept our financial preeminence and a million of our finest young men? Should we have left Africa to other colonisers such as Arabs, Germans, Belgians, French and Dutch? Should we have left India to be ruled by despots and allowed suttee and infanticide to continue? Should we have not collected taxes from the Americans to pay for the defence of the colony and instead left them to the native tribes and, even worse, the French?
We can only ‘pull together’ once we have a common cause. At the moment, no such cause exists; instead there is a whole range. At one end of the spectrum are those who will be dissatisfied with anything less than Britain’s return to the table reserved for world powers. At the other end are those who want Britain to become the self-contained little island it once was before its privateers planted the first seeds of imperialism in the 16th century.
Britain belongs with Europe, when people ask …Where is Britain? we say …It’s in Europe” 🙂
Donald
The people who are trying to stay apart are those who go to a country, set up their own little ghettos and refuse to integrate. No one has a problem with those who come and try to join in. Your meal is no problem… had more than one or two like that.
You make it sound as if everyone who emigrates makes things better… they don’t. Those who refuse to integrate want not only to change the world into which they have emigrated into a replica of what they ran away from, they also want to make the citizens of the host country live that way too. Well tough luck, I’m rather attached to the Western ideals of equality and democracy – and I think I have the right to live that way in any country which has espoused those ideals and I think I have the right to demand that anyone coming to those country espouses them too.
I don’t see enforcing sharia law, spitting on bikinied women on Bondi Beach, demanding the right to beat and rape wives, honour killings, etc as ‘making things better’. I see that as making my society, which has moved on from 700 A.D., very much worse… and if that’s racist, so be it – I’m proud to be that sort of racist. My ancestors didn’t throw off the constraints of Christianity for me to simply accept the constraints of another medieval, male orientated ‘religion’.
So because you say Britain’s in Europe, everyone in Britain has to accept they are European?
Doesn’t work like that.
Araminta, in re your #22 –
I outlined here on the Chariot last year the matter of the yobs on bikes terrorising my 92 year old father in East Grinstead, and the warning I received when I attempted to remonstrate with them.
With regard to –
I am flabbergasted that you can seriously claim that the term ‘sexual deviant’ is offensive, gobsmacked that you insist that it’s ‘rightly’ so – it’s a plain, unvarnished biological statement of absolute fact; you must be brainwashed to the point of being off your trolley if you can see that term as discrimination, let alone as something that requires a law against it.
Sorry, but there’s no point carrying on a debate within a psychotic framework where logic and respect for the factual statements no longer reign. Your comment is worthy of Orwell’s worst fictional excesses of double-think.
You may be ‘amused’ by ‘hegemonising’ of Islam; your ‘amusement’ pertinently answers your question as to why the UK is down the tubes.
Bearsy.
Do calm down. Your last comment is neither factual nor logical but neither was your original comment.
The UK is not “down the tubes”, just because you declare it to be so.
Hey! One has to induce “Debate”, it don’t come too easy these days, think of me as the “Devil’s Advocate”
Free the MALVINAS!!! has always been my motto … but now I have a new one!!
Euronize Briatain!!! “Euronize” … new word 🙂
Not me declaring it, Araminta. Read your original Hannan quotation “if we teach that the nation-state is finished” and your #4 “Where has it gone?”.
Bearsy.
I remember the incident you described regarding your father, but as I said, it is one regrettable incident, you cannot therefore assume with any degree of logic that this happens everywhere. It most certainly does not.
My amusement regarding the term “hegemonising” was to do with Iain Banks!
State of the Nation?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/feb/24/uk-trade-exports-imports#zoomed-picture
No, Bearsy, precisely the reverse.
We should stop doing so, is the point Hannan was making.
We have now, hopefully moved on from the years of New Labour, and their mountains of ill-conceived, badly written and largely unnecessary legislation and their disastrous immigration policy.
But back to the point again, if we do not believe in the values of the society in which we live, we can hardly expect immigrants to value it either.
Iain Banks – an excellent author (for a Jock) 😀
I have to plagiarise occasionally.
#38 Absolutely!
But it is also time to correct the excesses of socialism and revert to mens sana in corpore sano.
If I knew what it meant, Bearsy, I would probably agree with you!
Aha, isn’t Google wonderful? 🙂
Your Latin is up to that, I’m sure. Night-night, time for bed downunder! 😎
To be honest, there is nothing wrong with Britain that “time” cannot fix, sooner or later this generation of immigrants will die out and the next few will be British born and educated with the values that matter.
The incoming generation means nothing, we can never teach an old dog new tricks. it’s their children that we need to change.
That’s what happened to me, I was used to a life with no laws, total complete freedom and the God given right to look down on blacks (as taught by my mother) I came to Australia hating all blacks, Americans and Communists, after school in Australia I only hated Communism and the American Government. Truth!! 🙂
Night both Downunder. 🙂
Cuerpo sano y mente sana to you too Bearsy and Boadicea.
Gracias, Donald, buenas noches.
Thanks for your comment #28, Sipu.
I think you make some excellent points; particularly in your final paragraph.
Nor am I European, I’m German. Would it be at all possible for me to call myself “Anglo-German” as I have a British surname and remain loyal to the monarch in London, not the president in Washington?
Sounds very reasonable to me, Christopher. 🙂
Sipu: no, I have not read “Empire”. In the past I enjoyed reading Ferguson, but it came to a point where he seems to have just become another globalist shill. He would come to fail my credibility test when he compared the fastest-growing city in China with the most hard-hit city in the USA. If that is how he gauges things, then I have to remain sceptical. (Here’s a hint: why not compare impoverished provinces such as Anhui and Tibet with impoverished states such as West Virginia and prosperous regions such as Shanghai and Tientsin with Texas and Georgia)
I have, however, been putting in quite a bit of thought into the UK’s current lot and compared with with Germany’s. Not that Germany is perfect, but Germany is in significantly better shape at the moment than the UK. Germany has never really been that international a nation. It is relatively new (it only became a country in 1871) and was never a major imperial power. The few colonies that it did have were not significant in any way. (Let’s face it, Namibia, New Guinea, and the Caroline Islands hardly match up to India, Singapore, and Hong Kong)Germany lost its empire early on, hence it never really became more than a nationalist rallying cry after the war war was over. Germany remained a country concerned primarily with regional stability and regional strength. (Hitler excluded) The UK and its empire became very much intermeshed — there remain many traces of Britain in the former colonies and traces of the former colonies are in Britain. Losing the Empire, and in my opinion being duped into joining the EU, took a heavy toll on the UK. Europe is not a natural match for the UK, it never was. Many of the things that made Britain domestically distinct — from the production of fine porcelains which have long been a mark of distinction, to cars, to even the mixing of teas has either been sold off or production has been outsourced, hence remaining British in name only.
Christopher I am not sure I follow much of your last comment. I agree that Germany and England (Britain) are indeed very different, from a nationhood perspective at least. Racially, there is similarity. I know it is not acceptable to say so, but I do. Regarding what you say about Ferguson and his comparison of China and Virginia, I cannot comment. Can you provide me with the source? I am a fan of Ferguson, but last week I was talking to a senior BBC Economics editor and she was rather disparaging of him. Apparently he and Andrew Roberts are two historians who are particularly keen to perform for the media. But then having spoken to her at some length, I was not overly impressed by her grasp of current affairs. She believes that South Africa will go from strength to strength. She refused to believe that it was headed for a Zimbabwe-like scenario. She was besotted by the fact that the Zulu maid hugged the scion of the family with whom we were having dinner. To her this represented the epitome of racial peace and integration. The woman had no bloody idea. You only have to read todays Telegraph and the talk of nationalisation of the mines to realise how wrong she is. And yet people like her determine the way the world is going to think and behave. Life become very depressing sometimes. What is equally depressing is that when Mandela dies, the media circus will make the World Cup look like a kindergarten picnic.
Sipu: what I meant is that in most ways Germany as a country and as a society is more functional than the UK today. Germany is cleaner, the economy stronger, services more efficient, infrastructure better, and cost of living lower. Germany also has a much lower crime rate than the UK. My source comes from Ferguson’s “the Ascent of Money”. My reference to West Virginia (note: West Virginia and Virginia are two states, Virginia tends to be prosperous, West Virginia impoverished) was purely my own — simply attempting to illustrate his poor choice of comparisons.
As for South Africa… My personal view is that it might not last long after the death of Mandela.
The tribes have never seemed all too fond of each other. It seems that the only one able to hold it together is an ageing and increasingly sickly Mandela. Zuma is a cretin of the first order and Mbeki, while less cretinous than Zuma, was a far step down from Mandela.
Christopher
You make some very good points. Trying to push Britain into a European mould simply hasn’t worked, the differences are just too great. My feeling is that, while historically, Germany and the UK are different they probably have more in common with each other than with the Latin countries of Europe.
Sipu
I agree that it is appalling that people with what I would call ‘a hopeful outlook’ rather than a realistic grasp of what is really happening can determine the way the world thinks. I’m not into the “She’ll be Right” mentality which seems to the biggest affliction of Western society in dealing with its massive influx of alien cultures.
What I said in ‘The de-nationalisation of England.’
Boadicea: English and German are cousin languages and there are a good number of similarities between English and German cultures. They are not the same by any means, and the national character remains markedly different but the two are at least compatible with each other. I never cease to find it off that Germany and France are supposedly close allies when the two countries are so radically different in the national characters. A better alliance would be a UK-Germany alliance. I would also like to add that many Germans have settled in Anglophone countries, including the UK, and have largely become respectable, well-integrated members of those societies.
Christopher, you are unquestionably correct that Germany is better off than Britain. I do think a great deal of that is down to the fact that Britain was left broke after the war and received no aid while Germany was given significant assistance. Also Britain was left with huge complications as result of the break up of the Empire and its obligations to its former colonies. It also had military obligations as a senior member of NATO and as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. But I think more importantly, perhaps, was the fact that Germany did reinvent itself. It had to after the horrors of Nazism. Its people unified under a common national cause which was only strengthened when East and West reunited. Britain has not yet found that common cause. It does not reject its past in the way that Germany did.(Not that I am suggesting it should.)
Re Virginia, I know the state, my brother lives there and I am aware that West Virginia is impoverished in comparison. I am still not sure what two cities Ferguson was comparing or in what context, but I have the Ascent of Money and will look it up.
Boa, I think the problem is that organisations such as the BBC, certainly not limited to the BBC, have a policy of liberal optimism and pragmatists are not welcome. Imagine if this woman held right wing views and openly predicted a negative outlook. She would be branded a racist and would be chucked out. Because she is Indian by birth, I was rather hoping she would not be so constrained, but having spent her whole working life with the Beeb, I guess it comes naturally.
Sipu: you are absolutely right in pointing out that Germany received a great deal of aid where as the UK received none. I would also like to add that the USA served as a protector of Germany after the war ended, where as the USA continued to find ways to undermine the UK’s position in the world. It was not for no reason that a British statesman quipped “if you want the French to know about something, tell the Americans”. Germany was thus allowed to recover and grow with relatively few commitments and distractions. It was also helpful, for the West at least, that many companies from the East set up in the West after it was clear that the Communists would not relinquish power. There is also another factor which separates the two societies. That factor is tolerance. Germans are not at all a tolerant bunch and, to make it worse, tend to be very anal retentive. While Germans tend to accept people as they are, there are very clear lines of what is permissible and what is not permissible. If the lines are crossed there are very clear social repercussions. In the UK far too much is tolerated.
Now that’s why I joined this site – what a wonderful and interesting debate.
Christopher – how refreshing to hear your perspective – you have some compelling ideas and viewpoints
Unfortunately I am too late to join in this time, I look foward to the next one!
Ah, Cuprum.
It was an interesting debate; I merely provided the platform and there were, indeed, some well written and varied responses.
You could, of course, provide a discussion point yourself, should you be so inclined.
Glad to have you aboard though, and look forward to your contributions.