Resources

The continuing threat to the English from the British state and Globalisation

by the Revd. John Lovejoy - who writes from Newcastle upon Tyne

It is axiomatic for all nationalists that National Affinity is natural and normal for human beings generally, as a social definition.

We have belonged to nations from time immemorial, and to ancient tribal groupings long before that. The healthy development of the human mind and spirit have always depended on the communal stability that only nationhood can provide over a long period of time.

In our present time, however, it is clear that a number of rival social groupings have appeared such as threaten to challenge and even displace nationhood. I refer to the social constructs known as 'Class', 'Western Culture', and 'The State'.

The British State and true nationhood

In what follows, I write, not with the authority of one who understands all the issues involved. I don't. Rather, I write as one who sees - as we all do - the effects of a vast underlying malaise, whereas, like most of us I suspect, I have a very limited perception of the malaise itself.

Briefly, however much the British state may be said to neglect or even suppress English nationhood, identity and culture, it seems to press increasingly on my attention that The State itself is being overshadowed by the Corporate World, acting on a Global Scale.

Following from this, I get the abiding impression that the principal function of State politicians of all political parties has become that of interpreting to the population the will and demands of international Big Business and Finance Capitalism, and of enforcing the same through the Statute Law and the media.

The dangers of Globalisation  

Globalisation, it seems to me, is extremely dangerous, and for many reasons:  

It requires a global market that is as uniform as possible, with a globally mobile workforce of skilled and unskilled people. This goes right against our own belief in diversity on a worldwide scale.  

It requires uniformity of Mercantile Law on a global scale in order to facilitate the rapid and smooth operation of international trade at a high level.  

This very high level of international trade in raw materials and finished goods, as well as in fuel, is contrary to the planetary environmental needs, which are becoming increasingly urgent. There is far too much movement of goods and people.  

Uniform global brands epitomised by Coca-Cola

It requires access to all conceivable sources of minerals and other resources in order to satisfy the continuing expansion of production and consumption. This fact is clearly compromising the status of the Earth's last wild places - such as Greenland, Siberia and Alaska - and puts tremendous pressure on the governments of thinly populated or undeveloped areas. We might think of the Middle East or countries in Africa such as the Congo, Nigeria, Angola and the Ivory Coast as examples in the Third World, but - as already suggested - are we in an entirely different case?  

It actively discourages particular cultures and beliefs, such as would impede marketing strategies and the easy transferability of 'cosmopolitan persons' with requisite skills, and thus Nationality/Nationhood in our original sense is suppressed. By contrast, state citizenship (or 'nationality' in this false sense) is encouraged, as the Corporate World needs State Governments so they may carry out their role of interpreting the requirements, in each territory, of Global Big Business. Who the citizens are, in each such State, and what ethnic identity is, are of no concern to this high level management.  

It suppresses the culture, identity and beliefs of the individual people employed by transnational companies, who impose their own corporate ethic and values on the employees.  

Our culture and identity are under threat  

Most of us, like me, have a very limited understanding of the Corporate World and of Globalisation, but we do see their effects, as our national culture and identity are eroded and suppressed, and the economic base of our society has largely been destroyed or sold out.  

Band parade part of well dressing ceremony in Peak District

In conclusion, we can insist, then: we are entitled to speak out on what we see, even if our understanding of the underlying causes might be incomplete.  

The British Prime Minister, David Cameron, was recently reported as saying that multiculturalism did not work. Of course, he is correct in saying that. However, what Mr Cameron wants to substitute for multiculturalism is not a healthy and vigorous English nation replete with its continuing culture and identity, and with the current ethnic minorities living alongside us in peace and tolerance. No. Mr Cameron wants a 'muscular liberalism' within which ethnic and religious beliefs would be downgraded to mere personal lifestyle and personal beliefs - to be tolerated so long as they did not challenge or infringe Mr Cameron's (and before him Tony Blair and Gordon Brown) so-called 'British Values'. These values (which are quite different from the original notion of 'Britishness' that prevailed when I was younger), presumably, would be defined and enforced by the Westminster Government of the day and the mainstream media, particularly the BBC.  

England and the English, as always, do not even come into it!