Britishness: it is not about who we are but about who we want to be.

Blair's thoughtful speech yesterday highlighted - for me at least - the reality that building a positive national identity matters more than it has done in the past, and will matter more still in the future. I think it is true to argue that discussion about `British identity' has been a no-go area for liberal and left-of-centre politicians. What Blair argued for yesterday was the need for an inclusive British identity that can meet our needs in the 21st century. The problem however is that most attempts to do so have started from the assumption that there is a real `core Britishness' that we need to discover, articulate and require everyone - particularly newer communities - to share. There are real difficulties with this for all those that espouse a progressive agenda. Last year John Denham, as part of a Fabian Society debate, argued that historical Britishness contains strong strands of racism, exploitation and class division. He suggested that the other problem with what he called `discovered Britishness' is that is seems to place all the obligation to change on the newer communities and none on the majority.

The truth is that while incomers will always have the greatest adjustment to make, those of us who grew up in a Britain that was overwhelmingly white and confident in its imperial history need to know and understand that that Britain has gone for ever.

The question can not be who we are but who we want to be.




Display: Sort:

Re: Britishness (#1)

You can only intergrate if society both wants and welcomes intergration. In my experience England and Wales does not have any appertite for either.

Re: Britishness (#2)

Oh and Scotland does, does it?

What on earth does this mean, "England and Wales don't want integration"?

We would LOVE it if ALL (not just most of) the people who come here either fitted in from day 1 or tried to fit in and assimilate and get on with OUR society the way it is.

The British are, by international standards a pretty tolerant lot, which is a good thing, but there are plenty who feel that this is being abused.

Re: Britishness: (#3)

I thought maybe Tony Blair was using the same script-writer who he had for the 'hand of history' speech (and who I suspect may support a party other than our own...)

It was a muddled, contradictory speech; and the soundbite that made all the news broadcasts was just laughable.

I want to put a vote in for diversity!  I reject Blair's new improved version of Tebbit's cricket test.  I like the fact that I can support Ireland in the Rugby, England in the cricket and anyone but England in the football and that it DOESN'T MATTER.

What are these shared values we're supposed to have?  I don't think I share any values with Mrs. Thatcher (who is so saddened at the death of Pinochet!) or Nick Griffin.  I might add that while I share a lot of values with our beloved leader, occupying countries and spreading capitalism at the barrel of a gun (while simultanoeously rearming with nukes) are not amongst them.

No, it seems most of the talk of shared values is targeted quite specifically at Islam, and it is dangerous and foolish.  There are dangerous, ultra-conservative extremists who consider themselves Muslims, but they are the tiny minority.  This sort of thing doesn't unite the country in Britishness, it unites people who actually have little in common: "moderate" and "extreme" Muslims, for example.  And it gives words and arguments for the BNP and their kind to use in forthcoming and campaigns, and they will use them: they will quote Blair, Reid, etc. at every convenience, and then claim their policies are better suited to ridding society of this 'terrible scourge' than are the policies of the mainstream parties.