Hi!

 

It took a column by Gordon Sinclair to tell Canadians to stop complaining about the behemoth to the South – pointing out the many good things about the US that everyone forgets.

 

This one’s by a Brit about the Brits from the Daily Telegraph.

 

Needless to say, I liked it.

 

Thought you might like it too.

 

Harry

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

THE OPPORTUNITY IS WITH US AGAIN TO BE 

BRITISH  AND  TO  BE PROUD OF IT

 

By WF Deedes

 

Daily Telegraph (Filed: 27/07/2005)

 

Not since the victorious end to  the  Second  World  War  60

years  ago  has  this  country  had  a  better   chance   of

establishing a sense of national purpose and  what  so  many

yearn for - a renewal of the feeling "British and  proud  of

it".

 

In 1945 we were broke, rationed as heavily as  at  any  time

during the war, about to  dissolve  an  empire  and  nervous

about the post-war intentions of the Soviet Union. It was no

time for singing Land of Hope and Glory.

 

Since then, we have indulged  various  fantasies  about  our

role in the world. Harold Macmillan dreamed  of  us  holding

simultaneous links with Europe,  the  Commonwealth  and  the

United States. Winston Churchill's "Let Europe unite" became

the chosen course, though  with  different  intentions  from

those of the Community today.

 

With his unique experience of  both  world  wars,  Churchill

believed that a third conflict would wipe us  off  the  map.

His call won the support of my generation. How could  it  be

otherwise? Over and again I wrote to my wife from the battle

in Europe, saying "somehow we must find a  way  of  avoiding

our son, rising two, from having to go through this again."

 

Europe then widened its intentions in ways which required an

ever  increasing  degree  of  conformity,  and   took   from

sovereign parliaments some of their powers and prestige. The

controversy aroused by this contributed to the rejection  of

a proposed European constitution by two founder  members  of

the Community. We're back at the drawing board there.

 

With some experience of government, I am sceptical about the

human capacity to govern a federal Europe successfully.  The

United States of America grew up the way it is now. A Europe

of perhaps a score of members, differing  widely  in  wealth

and  culture,  would  be   a   much   tougher   proposition,

unmanageable in my judgment. Nothing happening in  Brussels,

including corruption comparable  to  anything  going  on  in

Africa, makes me less sceptical. We should push hard  for  a

re-think there.

 

The second influential trend in our post-war lives has  been

our policy - or lack of it - on immigration and  our  belief

in the blessing of a multiracial society, left free to  hold

whatever allegiances it pleased. There we are  undergoing  a

shock,  discovering  with  cruel  suddenness  that  we  have

incubated some who hate us, and hate us  so  much  they  are

willing to die in exterminating some of us.

 

This is a sobering thought  and  will  compel  us  to  think

afresh on the complex issue  of  allegiance.  We  cannot,  I

think, expect to draw that enviable degree of unity  America

draws from its diverse society, respect for the flag and  so

on. America today is top of the  world  pack.  For  all  the

criticism, its citizens have much to feel proud about.

 

But so in a different way has this small island. Our trouble

is not lack of achievement but - pray God  a  short-lived  -

radical culture which prefers to dwell on what  it  sees  as

our sins rather than our  virtues.  Queen  Elizabeth  is  an

illustration of this. Cast an eye over the history book  and

those who  have  reigned  over  us.  You  will  not  find  a

sovereign who has given us more faithful service.

 

She makes people of my  generation  proud  to  have  such  a

person as our head of state and proud to be British, for  no

other country has anyone as good. She is,  furthermore,  the

only person in history who has turned a former  empire  into

what we now call the British Commonwealth  of  Nations.  You

think it's tiresome? So do some of the politicians who  have

not given the Queen much encouragement.

 

She thinks it valuable  to  have  these  people  as  friends

rather than enemies, and she is  right  and  knows  them  by

their Christian names.

 

But what do we find? Modernisers, some of them  led  by  the

nose by that implacable republican Rupert Murdoch,  want  us

to have a president rather than a hereditary sovereign. They

do not attack the Queen directly but dwell on how  much  she

costs, on the follies of her descendants, the  stupidity  of

her advisers.

 

To much of the news media, including the BBC,  the  National

Anthem is anathema, the Union flag a joke. I  have  been  in

the news media all my working life and  I  love  it,  but  I

cannot deny that it consistently lays before us more  to  be

ashamed of than to be proud about. Bluntly, bad  news  sells

best.

 

But, of course, it goes wider than that.  Crossing  the  old

battle lines in Europe the other day, it dawned  on  me  how

much the sheer destructiveness of those world wars had given

the nation  state  a  bad  name,  developed  a  passion  for

internationalism and made  patriotism  sound  dangerous.  We

haven't reckoned enough on the indirect  influences  on  our

culture of those two wars.

 

I thought, too,  as  we  travelled  over  Europe,  of  what,

notwithstanding the wars'  horrors,  made  us  proud  to  be

British at that time. It was  because  something  was  being

asked of us and we  were  responding.  We  were  giving  our

country something, not making demands of it.

 

Nothing is asked of us today - except to pay taxes and local

rates and obedience to a swelling  bureaucracy.  Politicians

seek to win power by  doing  more  for  us.  Our  degree  of

dependency on the state for different  services  has  become

degenerating. It puts more votes into Mr Blair's pocket, but

it makes being proud to be British a degree harder. No, I am

not suggesting any new form of national  service.  It's  not

the right way to go about it and it would not work.

 

This has got to come from within. It would help if those  at

the top spoke more about the citizen's obligations and  less

of his rights and encouraged us to do more service  to  this

country. Too much emphasis  on  human  rights  is  a  deadly

creed. And why do they have to  keep  putting  an  Army,  of

which we can be proud, in the shit? I cannot believe  it  is

serving justice or our capacity to defend ourselves.

 

The reputation we have in distant lands, I have  learned  in

my travels, is higher than we give ourselves. They admire us

for our social stability, our parliamentary  and  diplomatic

experience, for fair play, for tolerance, for a  willingness

to help lame dogs over stiles, as well as for  some  of  the

qualities Shakespeare sang about in his plays. Some of these

qualities have taken a bit of a bruising of late,  but  they

are still there. The "in yer face" style is a silly, passing

phase we shall move on from.

 

During the last 200 years of relatively modern  history,  we

have suffered all manner of vicissitudes, made our share  of

mistakes, pulled round, remained  much  as  we  always  have

been, and, when the call  came,  responded  -  just  as  our

policemen and policewomen did when London was  under  attack

this month. It's our durability they admire in other  lands.

We've always been  a  rude  island  race.  We're  survivors.

That's what makes me proud to be British.

 

*******************************

Henry George School of Social Science

of Los Angeles

Box 655  Tujunga  CA 91042

818 352-4141

*******************************

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to