Home
Previous letters
Subscribe
Useful links
About me
Contact me
|
WORLD CITIZEN LETTER: 568
View full list of previous letters
Receive future letters by email
WCL 568 Sep 2007
'I am an English nationalist...'
I am an English nationalist partly because England is no longer a sovereign state and therefore is not in a position to threaten other states. Nor does England have an army; consequently it cannot use military force against other sovereign states. In short, the way could be open for England to become a completely pacific, law-abiding community, unlike the near-200 sovereign states that comprise the "United" Nations.
As a world citizen, I repudiate the talk of "British nationalism" Bandied about with all the puff an pomp of political posturing, it is designed to pander to the self-importance of the mass of voters who themselves have no great claim to power or significance. Vicarious belligerence enables such folk to feel emotions then fostered and encouraged by a gutter press more eager to boost circulation. Appeals to baser instincts are easier for journalists than offering rational judgement of international problems.
I am an English nationalist because of the breadth and scope of the language, although I wish its imperialist dominance could be checked. Having studied it, both its glories and its disreputable achievements, I revel in the vicissitudes of English history. I am a devotee of the English capacity for political innovation and compromise. Despite its bleaker moments, I admire the English aptitude for tolerance and ability to square circles, make possible the impossible and generally "know how to live".
From a youth when Empire Day was celebrated at school with praise, monarchy extolled and authority assumed correct without demur I changed. Then the stirring notes of the 'Marseillaise' indicated that the stuffy 'God Save the King' had serious competitors in musical zip and verve: and more pointed thoughts supervened. The local gods were inadequate: were better available? Communism, superficially international, was revealed to deeper analysis as Russian nationalism in a poor disguise.
By 1939 nationalism was obvious as again the route to war. The Nazis harnessed German nationalism to the most virulent form of tyranny. "The criminals had taken over the asylum" and the world indulged in a collective frenzy of nationalist killing and destruction. Nazism was the trigger but the German example had to be confronted and so nationalists everywhere could join in, insulated against reproach of inhumanity. Nation-states were the agents of war because only they held the means of unlashing violence on a really substantial scale. All the competitors - drug-dealers, bank-robbers, burglars, rapist, and other criminals of all kinds were amateurs in violence compared to the professionals - the military at the service of sovereign governments.
So I ceased to be a nationalist who supported the sovereign state system. Instead I gave my allegiance to a new grouping - humanity. And tentatively to the United Nations, although that "trade-union of governments" has many times betrayed the hopes of its partisans. Until is becomes democratic and escapes from the control of the war-makers - the Security Council powers - it will not provide what the human race need - a government to uphold world law and ban international violence.
The British government, having committed troops to fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, has failed to equip them fully and to provide satisfactory treatment for casualties and family housing in Britain. As a consequence, leading generals have complained of a failure to support the army, urging support for soldiers in these foreign hostilities. But some, like myself, do not support the involvement of the British army in such overseas entanglements and refuse support for those. The days of unthinking nationalism are past.
John Roberts
Comment on this letter
View full list of previous letters
Receive future letters by email
Comments on this letter
|
|