The State of Englishness
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3288From the desk of A. Millar on Mon, 2008-05-26 10:13
A few days ago (Friday, May 23rd) 18 year-old Ben Smith was stopped, in a routine check by a police officer, while driving his Vauxhall Corsa to his home in Melksham, Wiltshire. The officer found nothing amiss, but noticed an England flag on the parcel shelf (which Mr. Smith used to cover his music system from potential thieves) and ordered him to remove it. According to Smith:
He saw the flag and said it was racist towards immigrants and if I refused to take it down I would get a £30 fine. I laughed because I thought he was joking, but then I realized he was serious so I had to take it down straight away. I thought it was silly – it's my country and I want to show my support for my country.
This is merely the latest in a long line of such “politically correct” discrimination on the part of England’s authorities or its employees. In January 2007, a 27 year old man was ordered by Bedford Council to take down an England flag, that he had hung on the side of his house. In 2006 a fire station was ordered to remove an England flag, because, they were told, it might offend ethnic minorities (despite the local mosque protesting that it did not), and earlier this year a government report revealed that children were routinely punished for wearing clothing bearing the English flag.
But, then, ‘England’ is a subversive idea to a government that wants to hold the United Kingdom (UK) together, to sink it into the homogenizing machine of the European Union (EU). And ‘England’ and English nationalism are anathema to political correctness. We have seen this before, of course. A few decades ago a rising Scottish nationalism was considered a threat to the UK.
To combat this rise, the chief secretary of the Treasury in James Callaghan’s Labour government, Joel Barnett, was asked to devise a system of distributing funds between England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. While this was supposed to be a fair, as well as temporary system, the Barnett formula remains, and, today, means that 8 billion pounds (approximately 16 billion U.S. dollars) are diverted to Scotland every year, giving the Scottish government approximately 1,500 pounds more per person. Wales enjoys a similar financial advantage. Moreover, in 1998 the British government granted devolution to Scotland and Wales, creating a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly. It did not, however, devolve any powers to England, which remains the only country in Europe without national representation. Consequently, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs are able to vote the House of Commons, on matters that are limited to England, though English MPs have no reciprocal right.
All of this, in practical terms, has meant that residents of Scotland enjoy free college tuition, free parking, free healthcare, free dental check-ups, etc., while residents of England do not. Some medications are also free in Scotland that must be paid for in England. Similar benefits are afforded residents of Wales and Ireland. The Times recently commented, “As they contemplate higher food and fuel costs, rising council tax and poor services, they increasingly ask: why should the English get so much less than the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish?” This question is being asked, though mostly by those who live close to Scotland or Wales. The town of Berwick-upon-Tweed has even voted to become a part of Scotland, and the village of Audlem, Cheshire, to become a part of Wales, although such protests probably have little effect beyond highlighting the disparity.
Nevertheless, a turn toward localism is already making strides across Europe, and there is a growing sentiment toward devolution and even the eventual independence of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The S.N.P. is fighting to make Scotland (population of just over 5 million) an independent country, Plaid Cymru is seeking the same for Wales (3 million), as Sin Fein is for Northern Ireland (slightly less tan 1.75). Sin Fein also wants an eventual reunification with Southern Ireland.
Independence might seem a difficult sell to the electorate of these countries, but their nationalist parties have long been established. Plaid Cymru and the S.N.P. point out on their websites that some of the richest nations on the planet are likewise some of the smallest (e.g., Norway and Iceland), and both see independence as advantageous in negotiating with the E.U. It will be worth mentioning that Plaid Cymru is unhappy with the Barnett formula, and cites this as another reason for full independence:
[…] the current ‘Barnett Formula’ for the funding of Wales is outdated and unfair. It is not a question of whether Wales can afford to be independent but whether it can afford NOT to be independent.
[…] the amount of public expenditure devolved to Wales is based on population rather than needs of Wales. Under the current devolution settlement the Barnett Formula should be altered to ensure a fairer funding formula for Wales.
The issue is pressing. A referendum on Scottish independence looks set to take place in 2010. England has a population of over 50 million (i.e., approximately 10 times that of Scotland), but is ill prepared for an independence that seems increasingly likely. Its dominant political parties remain committed to keeping the U.K. Conservative leader David Cameron, has denounced “narrow English nationalism,” and what he calls, “the ugly stain of separatism.” The B.N.P. even seeks to enlarge Britain, welcoming Eire, “in a federation of the nations of the British Isles.” Labour and the Liberal Democrats are both staunchly pro-UK and pro-EU.
However, several organizations have been established in recent years, calling for an English Parliament (which is supported by nearly 70 percent of England’s population), and England’s first, and, indeed, only civic nationalist political party – The English Democrats – was founded in 2002. According to its manifesto, the English Democrats aims, “to build a society which accommodates the interests of all the people of England,” which would have its own “parliament and executive,” and a “wide-ranging Bill of Rights founded on traditional English civil liberties.”
The party also calls for a “complete end” to mass immigration, tougher border controls, “the deportation of all illegal immigrants,” and fines, and “possible withdrawal of trading rights […]” for companies employing them, etc. On, “England and Multiculturalism,” it says:
It is a fact that during the past forty years people of many different cultures have come to live in England. Our country is in that sense a multi-cultural society.
However, multiculturalism is an ideology which suggests that a mix of many cultures in one society is desirable and that it is the duty of government to actively encourage cultural diversity within the state. Further, it suggests that all cultures should be treated as equal. A logical extension of this is that all languages, histories and law codes should be treated equally. This is clearly impossible in a unified country. All ethnic groups should be free to promote their own culture and identity but the public culture of England should be that of the indigenous English. This position is consistent with the rights of indigenous nations everywhere.
A certain pragmatic localism is inherent in its position on the composition and democracy of England. Devolution should not be merely to England, but “within England,” through the current structure of local government. It aims, it says, “[…] to enable local people to identify with Local Authorities,” and would use referenda to allow people a greater say over local issues. In regard to composition, while the EU is attempting to impose regions on its now member countries, that effectively divide them up, marrying them to those of other countries, the English Democrats not only support withdrawing from the EU, but favors, “recognition for traditional counties, which would include the reunification of Yorkshire.” This county, has existed for 1100 years, but, reflecting EU strategy, has been broken up over the years into various administrative regions. Respect for traditional counties may seem a minor point to many, but it might prove the only option in a future that is looking local. In the last couple of weeks we have heard about the rise of Cornish nationalism (i.e., of the county of Cornwall), with its language (which has only 300 fluent speakers) looking set to gain official recognition.
Topic: The State of Englishness (Read 3147 times)