Celebrating Britishness
Is it really un-British to celebrate Britishness?
That's the question which has been triggered by that schoolchildren take part in citizenship ceremonies including, perhaps, an oath of allegiance to Queen and country.
Much the same reaction was triggered when Gordon Brown mused aloud about whether there was a British equivalent to the pride Americans took in flying their flag, leading many to fly them in their gardens.
Baroness Kennedy's called today's idea "silly" and "an empty gesture". The SNP government in Edinburgh have said . Even Team Brown sound rather lukewarm - welcoming the report as a contribution to debate.
However, no-one should be in any doubt that the prime minister believes that government can and should play a role in helping shape people's sense of what it means to be British. Before he moved to No. 10, many suggested that this was simply a ruse by Gordon Brown to distract from his Scottishness.
That was always too simple and too cynical. Brown is worried about social cohesion and he's also concerned about the threat posed to what you might call social democratic values by the growing sense of "unfairness" felt by many voters in response to mass immigration.
It is oft asserted that only "new" countries such as the US or post-war West Germany or those who've been through revolutions such as France can enjoy the simplicity of a national slogan - "Liberty, equality, fraternity" - or a written constitution or a national story like the "American Dream".
Not so, argues Brown, pointing out that the famous slogan at the base of the Statue of Liberty - "Bring me your huddled masses" - was added 17 years after the statue was erected as part of America's developing national story.
Thus, this government has introduced citizenship ceremonies, has just published proposals on so-called "", is working on a consultative process to write a British statement of values and is committed to a British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.
The debate about Britishness isn't going to go away even if the idea of schoolchildren swearing allegiance to the Queen does.
Oh, and by the way, the Goldsmith Review contains much more than just that - it proposes, amongst other things, that Westminster, like Holyrood, should have a Public Petitions Committee to give proper consideration to public lobbying and a pre-election Deliberation Day to invite all parts of the community to participate in publicly sponsored debates and discussions about the issues facing the electorate.
(pdf)
PS: I see that MPs are beginning to reform themselves. A new 拢25 limit for unreceipted expenses and a promise of a new audit system have followed the register of family members in employment today.
I'm 
Comments
Having attended a school in the US for a week as part of an exchange programme, I found the pledge of allegiance to be the most frightening piece of brainwashing I have ever witnessed myself. It goes completely against the concept of free will that you are forced to pledge allegiance to a piece of cloth.
Not for me thank you. Pledging allegiance to the Queen will make no difference until the "ruling classes" give us something to be proud of. Airports owned by Spain, utilities companies owned by Germany, our car industry owned by the US, Germany and China. And then the impression that people give over lots of their tax money to be squandered on bureaucrats and given to people who refuse to work.
Where are our charismatic leaders with faith in our country to do great things?
What exactly would we be pledging allegiance to? A broken shell of a country, whose population (and MPs) don't care about anything except themselves.
The problem with politicians defining 'Britishness' is that they appear to live in some rose-tinted goldfish bowl in cloud cuckoo land.
These are the people who tricked us into a global 'war on terror' in which we are told that our very way of life is threatened therefore we must change the way we live in order to 'win'! (Cost: Around 拢3.5bn) Who then 'nationalise' (i.e. pour public money into) a bank which will apparently make some very fat cats even fatter! (Cost: Around 拢50bn). Finishing with a call for a British bill of 'rights and responsibilities (Cost: Priceless!)
...And the free money for them (拢25) is still too much!
Labour would be better off scrapping the Barnett Formula and addressing the WLQ (English Parliament please) rather than introducing spurious oaths of loyalty.
Until the English have fiscal and democratic parity with the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish my family and I remain English not British.
The fact that the government don't know what 'Britishness' is, and need to commission research on it clearly shows that they are not fit to lead Britain and its people!
On the one hand they say that Britishness should be celebrated; on the other they are busy trying to kill it off in case it offends others.
Everyone I know is satisfied that they recognise 'Britishness' - it is labour, the loony left and liberals who have abandoned it and forgotten it in their (failed) quest for a different kind of society.
If you don't recognise it then you aren't part of it - make way for those who do, and are.
In your post, you equate "an oath of allegiance to Queen and country" with "celebrating Britishness," thereby implying that those who object to the oath also object to celebrating Britishness. I know you spend a lot of time around politicians, but this seems like a somewhat dishonest sleight-of-hand.
Let's not forget something - for as long as we have a monarchy, we are subjects, not citizens!
And just exactly how does unelected, comrade Brown represent modern Britain.
I noticed that the report recommended that students could reduce their tuition fees by volunteering.
English students presumably; students that have had fees imposed upon them by Scottish MPs - whose constituents don't have to pay those fees - voting on English legislation.
I have a feeling that most of this Britishness manifesto will apply only to England. Scotland and Northern Ireland certainly have sense enough to ignore all the parts that devolution allows them to.
this is such a badly thought out idea, would they try and apply it to northern ireland? having grown up there i can say it would be the most divisive thing. It would further enforce divides that are slowly falling away, and im many cases lead to out right violence in some schools.
I have also visited the US and i find the whole flag pledging disturbing. And is this really need by the teenagers of this country? other parts of the report are commendable, such as the idea of community service for reduced tuition fees, but this flag idea is distastful and forceful and thus decidedly unbritish.
Hello, have any of these Brit's actually been to the UK?
As a "Yank" that had made his first visit last year, I'd suggest that there are a number of people who've lost sight of the forest for the trees.
Every last thing I encountered was uniquely "British"- From the roadways to the railways, castles, chips and casks of Real Ale, and I was duly impressed by the Britishness of it all.
Wondering aloud, it might be a good idea (for those feeling a lack of national pride, at least) to take a step outside their borders for a few weeks, then reevaluate whatever take on the matter they might've held?
While I may feel (as an outsider) that taking an oath "To Queen and Country" can only enhance a sense of Britishness, I suggest the people living "across the pond" simply take a fresh look at the things around them.
From quid to Queen, the UK is already more British than you think.
;-)
Swearing allegiance to an anachronistic and undemocratic system of governance, that regards me as a "subject" simply by accident of birth?
Roll on Scottish independence!
The fact that the government don't know what 'Britishness' is, and need to commission research on it clearly shows that they are not fit to lead Britain and its people!
On the one hand they say that Britishness should be celebrated; on the other they are busy trying to kill it off in case it offends others.
Everyone I know is satisfied that they recognise 'Britishness' - it is labour, the loony left and liberals who have abandoned it and forgotten it in their (failed) quest for a different kind of society.
If you don't recognise it then you aren't part of it - make way for those who do, and are.
What people on the left of politics don't seem to realise is that a "national story" develops organically, it's not something plotted out by the Government as some sort of script. It's the narrative of a nation's history that makes it, not the contrived slogans of a bunch of politicians.
What Brown and others on the left propose are devoid of legitimacy because their proposals are dreamt up, not something that has simply come about.
The whole idea is barmy.
Part of the idea of "Britishness" is a healthy disrespect for authority and a dismissive attitude towards the pomposity of the state.
I would never swear an oath, I don't stand for the national anthem and I am a republican. I don't have a patriotic bone in my body, why should I? The fact I am British is simply down to being born here.
Democracy means if I want to reject this medieval flummery then I can and those who accuse me of a lack of "Britishness" are simply missing the point.
Instead of this empty and rather un-British pledge of allegiance wouldn't it be better if we taught young people more about the substance of Britishness at school?
This Government has through a misguided sense of inclusion left many Minorities and British people themselves with no historical or cultural education about the country in which they live.
A solution could for example be to teach students to be able to sing 10 British Hymns, have read 10 British classics, cook 10 British dishes, name the 10 greatest Britons, name the last 10 monarchs, and the 10 most influential events in British History. All of these of course would be up for debate, but this in itself is healthy.
In short we need substance over spin.
This government will do anything to remove England from the map this is what "Britishness"is all about,give England ,Scotland ,and Wales their own St.Days holiday not a British Day.
And while the children are swearing allegiance to the Queen,let them also swear allegiance to the countries they live in.
But no!!!that would mean the children in England would have to be told they are English and that is something the Labour Party just could not stomach.
Perhaps government ministers should swear an oath not to waste tax payers money or issue spurious garbage like this. Surely there are much more pressing issues in the world right now?!
I noticed that the report recommended that students could reduce their tuition fees by volunteering.
English students presumably; students that have had fees imposed upon them by Scottish MPs - whose constituents don't have to pay those fees - voting on English legislation.
I have a feeling that most of this Britishness manifesto will apply only to England. Scotland and Northern Ireland certainly have sense enough to ignore all the parts that devolution allows them to.
Perhaps we'd all feel a bit more British and patrotiic if our Government was not hell bent on absorbing this country into the facless, authoritarian and dictatorial EU.
If I've read the Lisbon treatistution correctly, I understand that we will, in effect, all officially become EU citizens when the treaty is enforced next January so why the push for Britishness all of a sudden?
So if MPs are reforming themselves and showing their expenses. When are you going to publish your expenses Nick - expenses we pay for from the licence fee?
For Britishness see Englishness, we in Wales are Welsh, those in Scotland are Scottish and I don't know
how the Catholic section in Northen Ireland see themselves. So in these countries it will be a non starter we have been trying in Wales to get St Davids day recognised as a public holiday, but we are told it would disrupt industry, but they can insall another public holiday to show your alligience to England.
I would like to see what happens if they try and force students from iner city schools to swear their alligience. I think they will tell them where to shove it.
Why don't we stop trying to become the next American state by copying everything they do.
If our trusted Politicions showed their loyalty to their own people and Country they might be in with a slim chance getting the support of the English people.
The fact that the government don't know what 'Britishness' is, and need to commission research on it clearly shows that they are not fit to lead Britain and its people!
On the one hand they say that Britishness should be celebrated; on the other they are busy trying to kill it off in case it offends others.
Everyone I know is satisfied that they recognise 'Britishness' - it is labour, the loony left and liberals who have abandoned it and forgotten it in their (failed) quest for a different kind of society.
If you don't recognise it then you aren't part of it - make way for those who do, and are.
The idea of 'Britishness' is deep within a person. It cannot be taught or imposed or indoctrinated, or even encouraged, by another.
I know perfectly well what it means to be British, though I might not be able to explain it to someone who does not know.
I must admit, the approach this government takes to the question leaves me confused. On the one hand you have Margaret Hodge attacking the Proms, specifically the Last Night, as being somehow not 'inclusive' enough. Yet we now have Lord Goldsmith wanting us all to be forced to swear allegiance to the Queen (an idea I think is ridiculous - and I speak as someone who has proudly sworn an oath to serve the Queen).
To be brutally honest, I think this is outside the government's remit.
In the first place I am English.
In the second I have a strong dislike for being forced to do anything.
Finally why is a Scot seeking to impose a new and unnecesary law on the English?
To blame the government outright for this report is a little misguided, they have simply order a study on the subject which has simply turned out to be a bit rubbish.
Britishness just is. You dont need to swear alligence, you dont need to have a picture of the Queen in you front room to know that you are British.
If the government wants people to be prideful of being British then maybe they should stop turning up late to important foreign treaties, not stiffle debate, renege on manifesto promises, mock liberty and destroy individuality. This government is consistantly top down with its approach, they shoudl let the British worry about Britishness while they get on with trying to run our country
Swearing on oath of 'Britishness' to a German Queen with a Greek husband?
I'm sure she regards this as redolent of the state of Titipu that we have arrived as a result of the pomposity of this government.
Perhaps government ministers could simply promise to do their jobs, stop wasting money on non ideas, carry out their manifesto obligations and give the Queen something intersting to tell us in her next speech to parliament.
The poor Queen must be sitting in Buckingham Palace wondering what on earth things have come to that the beaurocrats have been let loose all over our country making pronouncements of meanlingless value.
When will this dystopia end?
When did the Queen last say no to any policy document put before her? Didnt think so. So why swear allegiance to a mere puppet figure head who is as empty and vacuous as the government. And Lord Goldsmith, the man who helped send the UK off to war has yet again revealed why it is necessary to have a national DNA bank...only that way can we discover who is doing all this inbreeding.
Ha ha ha
This is so funny; I am beyond words. I guess this means my grand-dad is more british than most people born and bred on the isles.
In his time, they had to raise the Union Jack everyday at assembly and pledge allegiance to a foreign queen who visited once every 50 years. Plus he fought in WW2, as a soldier on the British side.
Does anyone know if one can claim citizenship based on that?
I made that oath thirty years ago as part of my naturalisation process. I guess everyone who is naturalised has sworn an oath of allegiance - unlike you native born subjects. However, my oath has always rankled and I have long considered formally renouncing it. No idea what effect that would have - I'll look into it I think.
This really is a hotchpotch of muddled thinking or political scheming. The government that gave us the Scotland Act 1998 and devolution in Scotland allowing them to celebrate their Scottishness (and you only have to go to Edinburgh to see how it is no longer British) now gives England "Britishness"
The Scotland Act 1998 assigns to Scottish Ministers the responsibility for setting bank holidays in Scotland so clearly any "British" bank holiday legislation passed at Westminster will only apply to England.
If we are going to celebrate Britishness lets do it after the Scotland Act 1998 has been repealed from UK legislation and we are once again a United Kingdom, Until that day let us celebrate our Englishness in the same way that the Scots do.
Interestingly I was walking down Whitehall a couple of days ago and was heartened by the number of St Georges flags for sale. Clearly the feeling of "Englishness" is growing south of the border and this government wants to snuff it out.
That in my view is the real reason for this report. The MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath has been rumbled.
Nick
If Brown鈥檚 so lukewarm on this why did he flag it up at PMQs last week?
Answering a question about voting age he talked about the work of the Youth Citizenship Commission, 鈥渘ot just in relation to the voting age, but the education in the curriculum on citizenship and whether there is a case for a citizenship ceremony when people come of age.鈥 No doubt in return for a shiny new ID card.
Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. What do they have in common? Three of Gordon鈥檚 鈥渉eroes鈥 who would have failed any definition of citizenship advanced by the governments they opposed.
This illiberal, intrusive and hectoring Government failed my Britishness test a long time ago. I can only hope the derision piled on this causes a U turn as quick as the election that never was. At least it gives those who still need persuading the chance to see him for what he really is 鈥 a gutless control freak.
I am English but moved to The Netherlands when 18 years old and engaged to a Dutchman. I have lived here now for 39 years and have had dual nationality for almost the same length of time. I could apply for a Dutch passport but wouldn't even contemplate it as I would have to give up my British passport. I am proud of my origin.
The comments left so far have complained that there isn't anything worth being British for and that the government don't know what 'Britishness' is. I'd strongly agree with this:
The fact the government are looking to introduce revived awareness of our monarchy says exactly the opposite, doesn't it? If there is anything British people can identify with and call their own its our monarchy, a monarchy that is embedded in our history and culture.
The government aren't pretending to be overtly British, or pretending to transform everyone to being overtly British. The whole idea of introducing an awareness of our national identity through monarchy to those being schooled [b]today[/b] surely admits that they're looking to the country's future? If the next generation goes through their schooling with this increased awareness, who's not to say they won't be shaping a better British identity?
Ashley has concerns that an oath of allegiance is too much like brainwashing for our own good. I'm not sure when you were in school here, or in America, but our very syllabus is a tangent of brainwashing, surely? I don't think there was a historical topic I studied that didn't incorporate some form of British identity. The Battle of Hastings, Britain in the Wars, Medieval Europe and Britain's superiority...
Maybe national ceremonies are too much and too 'tacky'. I was waiting for a friend the other day as I looked over some souvenirs in a London shop and cringed at a few items that were covered in the Union Jack and pro-British slogans.
Take a look around us in the world today. We know America have strong emphasis on their national values and have days/oaths to solidify that. Parts of the Middle-east strongly maintain their national values and fight for what they're worth. Think of Russia and China who strongly encourage national values in their children at schools. Can you honestly say Britain fits into one of these categories already? Propaganda is still all around us in the world. Why should Britain fall behind by failing to incorporate one simple turn for awareness towards nationality? Is an oath of allegiance really all that bad?
The cynicism around politics at the moment and in fact around the whole notion of our national identify - as exemplified in these posts in fact - is truly worrying.
It actually makes you wonder whether the british state is under threat/ sustainable
"However, no-one should be in any doubt that the prime minister believes that government can and should play a role in helping shape people's sense of what it means to be British."
They've shaped it by mangling it out of all recognition.
Habeus corpus - gone
Right to protest - gone
Right to privacy - gone
National sovereingty - disappearing fast.
Now they are insisting that we all need to register with the government to proof our innocence and swear allegiance to some parasitic family who are only on the throne by virtue of the fact that their ancestors oppressed our ancestors.
The worst thing is that they are talking about coercing people into this by giving them reduced taxes. That's clearly a bribe, but this idea comes from a politician so they probably think that's fine.
I would swear allegiance to a table lamp if it reduced my council tax bill. It wouldn't make me a citizen of Ikea.
I noticed that the report recommended that students could reduce their tuition fees by volunteering.
English students presumably; students that have had fees imposed upon them by Scottish MPs - whose constituents don't have to pay those fees - voting on English legislation.
I have a feeling that most of this Britishness manifesto will apply only to England. Scotland and Northern Ireland certainly have sense enough to ignore all the parts that devolution allows them to.
This from a government who don't trust the British people to vote in a referendum on the EU Treaty.
To blame the government outright for this report is a little misguided, they have simply order a study on the subject which has simply turned out to be a bit rubbish.
Britishness just is. You dont need to swear alligence, you dont need to have a picture of the Queen in you front room to know that you are British.
If the government wants people to be prideful of being British then maybe they should stop turning up late to important foreign treaties, not stiffle debate, renege on manifesto promises, mock liberty and destroy individuality. This government is consistantly top down with its approach, they shoudl let the British worry about Britishness while they get on with trying to run our country
So, what happens to those British born students who refuse to pledge?
Prison? Community service? "Re-education" a la Chairman Mao?
I come from Singapore, a country of immigrants, and said the pledge of allegiance every single day in school during assembly. The argument that a pledge of allegiance (to who/what is another debate) "takes away the very liberties that we have fought so hard for", or that it is "brainwashing" is, quite frankly, ridiculous. I never felt that saying the pledge took away any part of my freedom, and assume (even though my birth country is known as an authoritarian democracy) that I would have been quite at liberty to keep silent had I chosen to (the teachers don't go around with a list of names keeping track, you know). I would also like to think that I have kept my critical functions, and am able to be objective about what is happening in my birth country while remaining loyal to it.
Countries are, at the end of the day, imagined communities, held together by an ethnic or civic identity. In a country with more and more first generation citizens, little things like a pledge go a long way to foster the civic institutions that hold us together. The more sinister question seems to be: If you are a British citizen, why should you not want to encourage this?
"Where are our charismatic leaders with faith in our country to do great things?"
He resigned as PM last year.
Thanks to our media pack, charisma is characterised as spin, faith in our country is said to be naive pandering to the mob, and doing great things is seen as a waste of money.
Nick
If Brown鈥檚 so lukewarm on this why did he flag it up at PMQs last week?
Answering a question about voting age he talked about the work of the Youth Citizenship Commission, 鈥渘ot just in relation to the voting age, but the education in the curriculum on citizenship and whether there is a case for a citizenship ceremony when people come of age.鈥 No doubt in return for a shiny new ID card.
Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. What do they have in common? Three of Gordon鈥檚 鈥渉eroes鈥 who would have failed any definition of citizenship advanced by the governments they opposed.
This illiberal, intrusive and hectoring Government failed my Britishness test a long time ago. I can only hope the derision piled on this causes a U turn as quick as the election that never was. At least it gives those who still need persuading the chance to see him for what he really is 鈥 a gutless control freak.
It'll never happen in Scotland!
Very few people think of themselves as British anymore.
"Where are our charismatic leaders with faith in our country to do great things?"
He resigned as PM last year.
Thanks to our media pack, charisma is characterised as spin, faith in our country is said to be naive pandering to the mob, and doing great things is seen as a waste of money.
Just how can any modern British government even contemplate requiring an oath of allegiance to "Queen and country" for every UK citizen? Yet Lord Goldsmith's incompetent report makes a mockery of what multicultural British citizenship should mean - by urging that young citizens should be required to swear just such a solemn promise when leaving school.
Apparently the good lord, as our erstwhile top law officer, wants republicans and anti-royalists to LIE on oath! And he wants government to impose sanctions on young people who refuse to "volunteer" for such hypocritical ceremonies!
For a nation once proud to pioneer fundamental liberal values, and which claims to enshrine freedom of conscience within its laws, enforcing such a step upon new immigrants is disputable enough . Yet it is plainly bizarre to advocate imposing such a contentious requirement upon indigenous British citizens - most obviously those non-English ones who may be sincere Welsh or Scots nationalists.
This latest authoritarian and coercive declaration from the edge of government is at least obliged to stop short of one such archaic demand. Goldsmith is no longer free to call for a still more ancient and outdated mode of patriotic confession - namely extending the oath to embrace the Christian God as well as the monarch. For to go that far would fall foul of our new legal prohibitions against religious discrimination - which criminalize any institutional sanctions made against a person refusing to recognize or invoke such an alleged divinity.
Yet we have no law which explicitly prohibits discrimination against anti-royalists. So the issue is whether the Human Rights Act 1998's stipulation of a general "right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" will suffice in this matter? Prima facie it should, since the right's recognized exemptions concern "the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others". And surely those cannot reasonably apply to anyone's refusal to lie about their principled rejection of royalism?
To incur official disapproval and financial penalties, for refusal to swear an appropriate allegiance to law and country, might just be half-defensible. But to suffer for denying an antiquated devotion to the undemocratic British monarchy would be amongst the biggest legal and political outrages of modern times. What would that conceivably do to address the many causes of alienation from our failing "common bond" of loyal citizenship? Is this kind of blinkered, futile, barely coherent, yet deeply immoral gimmickry becoming typical of what our government's massive consultancy budget continues to waste our taxes upon?
"Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -- how passionately I hate them!" Albert Einstein
I am not sure how you can make someone proud of something they are not naturally going to be proud of anyway.
We might be far better to address things like:
1) Our inability to manufacture anything of substance anymore.
2) Our increasing inability to feed our own population without significant imports.
3) Our increasing reliance on power generation from elsewhere.
4) Our increasing inability to win at any sport of international worth (football, cricket, rugby, athletics etc etc etc).
While all this goes on our so called leaders worry about 'pledges', ID cards and non-doms.
Is it any wonder that people are increasingly lacking in pride in our once great country?
In order for us to be proud of Britain all we need is a Britain to be proud of. Easy.
"Britishness" as far as I am aware is an umbrella term supposedly describing anything Scottish, English, Welsh or Northern Irish.
The notion that there is some mythical "British" identity we should all be striving to seek in our lives is as ridiculous as asking someone why they don't speak "European".
An empty gimmick like this is clearly an attempt by the Prime Minister to divert attention from his true (Scottish) identity, of which he is only too conscious and perhaps afraid of in this time of jealousy over Scottish spending, which is increasing across the UK.
It is not being cynical to suggest that Mr Brown is using 'citizenship' and 'Britishness' as a ruse to deflect from that fact he is a Scot representing a Scottish constituency.
You see, I quite like the idea of affirming my loyalty and love to my country.
Its a love that could get over my issues with the monarchy because I recognise she represents the nation that I love.
Its just... As a Briton -and I think this goes for most British people- I would feel a terrible fool standing there saying it.
I much prefer to feel the love inside myself than to stand atop a podium and declare it with words written by someone elses hand.
I think it's a bad idea. Britain, and London especially, is a bit of a melting pot. I was born in Ireland but have lived in England for most of my life so I feel 'Anglo Irish'. I love both countries and this is expressed in many ways that cannot be summed up by what is being suggesed.
If we need a common cause to really unite us, the fight to stop global warming would be a much more unifying way of doing it.
How is a ceromony supposed to magically turn people into well behaved citizens that are proud to be British? It'll be just a meaningless ceremony if they are forced to do it anyway- and some will use it as an excuse to mess around as they are teenagers and some teenagers do that when bored! Then there is the problem of not all of our native peoples consider themselves British- some are not British in their own minds but Welsh, Scots or Irish and not British and Welsh, Scots and Irish. With a voting system that puts a party that got so few votes as labour in power and Politicians that don't live in the real world and nothing to make them feel there's something about being British to be proud of and so on a Ceremony won't make any differenc at all to the cohesion of society and make make more Scots want independence from the UK to boot!
This is causing so much controversy I am wondering if there is any thing coming out today the Government would like to have hidden
Dear All
I am Scottish, I don't consider myself british anymore.
My reason why should I fight for a country which will not fight for me?
I would rather do prison than enlist to defend "my" Country.
We live in a two tier society, split down the middle.
This let's all be British stunt is purely for the papering over of a huge crack in society.
Imagine being asked to die for New Labour policy!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
I find it interesting just how irritated many are by this proposal. In particular many see it as aimed at the English as the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish seem to have much better national identity already.
In this regard to overtly mention England or English nationality still seems to be politically incorrect.
For example how often does the 91热爆 News refer to English sportsmen/women - we have references to Scottish, Welsh, Irish and British.
So there it this - Promoting Britishness is a rather pathetic attempt to deflect growing English nationalism that is brewing up in response to the perceived unfairness of devolution and general feeling that English voters clear wishes are either ignored (e.g. on immigration, the death penalty, Europe etc.) or worse laughed at by our Political masters.
I believe this initiative will be counter productive, which will be worrying for those who support the Union.
Will this mean I can have "BRITISH" stamped on my ID card?
I was born in and continue to live in this country but I do not and will not hang any nationalistic label on myself - British, English, European or any other. I am a human being. These nationalist concepts are purely political conveniences and offer nothing of value to ordinary people (look what Hitler's concept of nationalism did for the Germans in the 30s and 40s). Of course, these issues matter to Alex Salmond and Gordon Brown, they have their own interests to consider, but anyone else who subscribes to this nonsense is simply falling prey to cynical manipulation.
Discussions about Britishness in Britain always seem to take the same turn as when US politicians talk about "Values" (Family or otherwise).
Certain people will employ the term with immense confidence and snort with disbelief at any naysayers on the basis that they must be namby-pamby liberals of varying hues of pink.
But actually getting a definition that anyone agrees on is nigh-on impossible.
Evocations of tea on the lawn and summer cricket on the village green don't have much resonance in Glasgow or Moss side. Likewise Anglicanism or Royalism seem very 1950s ITV sunday evening drama. And let's not mention Hugh Grant or Austin Powers.
The assertion that Britishness equates to some wooly notion of fair play will be greeted with astonishment by those whose ancestors (or indeed their selves) have been kept down by the class system or by imperial excursions and ventures abroad.
We all know this is a roundabout way of saying that there are too many people about whose loyalites and cultural allegiances lie elsewhere and a small number of them may actively work against the UK (no-one is mentioning the "M" word, but it is taken as read) and that we need a concerted strategy to bring them and their british-born offspring into line in such a way that will be not be greeted with outrage either in the target communities or by the general populace (particularly the splitter provincials) the strategy is also being applied to.
Good Luck in that. (I would say "Best of British", but that might be taken the wrong way)
If we include nationalist ceremonial display as part of the school day, would a child who continually refused to participate could be expelled from school?
I understand and agree with the idea of social contract - where we recognise mutual rights and obligations - but there are not many contracts where one party is meant to abase itself to the other.....
The comments left so far have complained that there isn't anything worth being British for and that the government don't know what 'Britishness' is. I'd strongly agree with this:
The fact the government are looking to introduce revived awareness of our monarchy says exactly the opposite, doesn't it? If there is anything British people can identify with and call their own its our monarchy, a monarchy that is embedded in our history and culture.
The government aren't pretending to be overtly British, or pretending to transform everyone to being overtly British. The whole idea of introducing an awareness of our national identity through monarchy to those being schooled today surely admits that they're looking to the country's future? If the next generation goes through their schooling with this increased awareness, who's not to say they won't be shaping a better British identity?
Ashley has concerns that an oath of allegiance is too much like brainwashing for our own good. I'm not sure when you were in school here, or in America, but our very syllabus is a tangent of brainwashing, surely? I don't think there was a historical topic I studied that didn't incorporate some form of British identity. The Battle of Hastings, Britain in the Wars, Medieval Europe and Britain's superiority...
Maybe national ceremonies are too much and too 'tacky'. I was waiting for a friend the other day as I looked over some souvenirs in a London shop and cringed at a few items that were covered in the Union Jack and pro-British slogans.
Take a look around us in the world today. We know America have strong emphasis on their national values and have days/oaths to solidify that. Parts of the Middle-east strongly maintain their national values and fight for what they're worth. Think of Russia and China who strongly encourage national values in their children at schools. Can you honestly say Britain fits into one of these categories already? Propaganda is still all around us in the world. Why should Britain fall behind by failing to incorporate one simple turn for awareness towards nationality? Is an oath of allegiance really all that bad?
Is Britishness defined by been absolutely tolerant of everything under the sun and having no identity in case it appears to be nationalistic?
Or is it still fish and chips and country pubs?
Fish and chips are bad for you and housing growing populations does away with the countryside.
I couldn't swear an oath to an oath in a nightclub going on about how tough it was during his stint at war.
Especially as the MOD protected him at all times in a major PR stunt.
One observation from one foreigner;
One thing I couldn't help but to note, was that the very structure of the "comments" section might reveal something of the present state
of Britishness.
After every posted comment, there's a blue highlighted bit 'o text reading "Complain about this post".
Is that, today, the extent of British commentary?
No matter what you think of us here, Stateside, we'd at the very least have been presented with the option to "agree" with another's opinions.
It's a simple thing, and perhaps something only someone outside the UK might notice, but is it really the case, these days, that a "real Brit" might only be able to voice a complaint?
On the other hand... most of what I've read since this morning hasn't been anything but rank cynicism, so...
To blame the government outright for this report is a little misguided, they have simply order a study on the subject which has simply turned out to be a bit rubbish.
Britishness just is. You dont need to swear alligence, you dont need to have a picture of the Queen in you front room to know that you are British.
If the government wants people to be prideful of being British then maybe they should stop turning up late to important foreign treaties, not stiffle debate, renege on manifesto promises, mock liberty and destroy individuality. This government is consistantly top down with its approach, they shoudl let the British worry about Britishness while they get on with trying to run our country
I'd like to know how Goldsmith went from determining what was "British" (that's English, thank you very much) to wanting to reform or scrap the Treason Laws. Lots of government meddling going on with the oldest institutions of our land. The treason law was adjusted as part of the 2005 Crime Bill, reform of the House of Lords, proposals for a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities (which sounds like it replaces our oldest legal document, that defines our civil rights as citizens). I say we get these people OUT of Parliament, and look at what they're really doing to our country.
It's time to clean house, ladies and gentlemen.
Just a thought but why not make the oath to the constitution even though we do not have a written one. I am a republican by conviction and while it would be difficult pill for me to swallow to take an oath of allegiance to a queen, I would not have the same qualms taking one to the constitution. The queen is queen only through the will of the majority of the people. As a democrat I accept that, but at the same time I would hope that in the long run it is possible to change Britain to a republic through the existing constitution.
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what Britishness means these days, seeing as freedom of speech and democracy continue to take a hammering in new legislation.
Mr Brown PM and MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, could always start by abolishing the Scotland Act 1998.
Then the recommendations in the report could be implemented in Britain rather than just in England.
I served 22 years in the British Army. As part of the enlistment you have to swear an Oath of Allegiance to the Monarch, their heirand succesors blah blah etc etc. I did it even though I don't believe in the Monarchy then and I certainly don't now either.
But I'm British.
And also, what about the likes of Dennis Skinner MP? He as an MP has to swear his oath even though he quite obviously has less time for the royals than even the French revolutionaries.
It's all rather pathetic really and any politician who is taking this seriously is even more so.
Nick,
Your view that the debate about Britishness isn't going away is spot on - but you are viewing it from the wrong end of the telescope. 'Britishness' is a political creation whose time has long gone; pushing it just confirms its irrelevance, and the need for self-determination. Read Brian's Blog on the bbc webpage to gauge the reaction in Scotland to Goldsmith's patronising and ludicrous suggestion. Westminster is another country.....just consider how Scottish Labour MPs love telling us how much we depend upon the union [whilst their noses are firmly in the trough].