Simon Maine
England is a land of opportunity with a history forever inter-twining with the people of other lands. The Roman, Viking and Norman invasions have historically contributed to the mix of people that are proud to refer to themselves as English today. More than ever, England is welcoming people whose ancestral heritage stretches all over the planet and it is a source of pride to me that so many from so far away would wish to live in our land.
No national borders are set in stone but nationhood comes easier to those who live on an Island. We should therefore embrace our fellow islanders. Englishmen are not in competition with Scotsmen, Welshmen or Irishmen - we are all from the same stock, just as we are from the same stock as those in Europe and the rest of the world. England has a distinct identity thanks to its history 800-year history as a nation with its own parliament but this should not signal the end of our journey.
England is as artificial a creation as any nation can be. The Anglo Saxon tribes were fiercely separate from one another and if it wasn’t for the Romans, the English boundary-lines may never have been drawn as they are today. We would do badly to forget this. Wales and Scotland grew as separate nations because they were not colonised by foreign invaders. England, before most, knew what it was like to accept foreign cultures and peoples. It was this that helped us to grow together as a nation. When other European nations were mercilessly persecuting Jews in the 11th century, it was to England that they fled, under the protection of our first Norman king William the Conqueror. From that moment to this, England has been a shelter for those in need - a place of refuge in a land where needless persecution is anathema to its people.
But now England no longer exists alone - we have become part of something greater. England can pride itself as being at the heart of the United Kingdom, a union in which our total strength is much greater than the sum of the parts. It is no secret that men stand stronger together. We should not lament the loss of England as a distinct political entity because we are creating something much better. It may be tempting to think that the addition of new cultures can weaken our own but we must always remember that our culture was given to us and not formed by us. We are at our best when we think for ourselves and the variety of cultural norms in England constantly prompts us to re-evaluate our own ideas.
Having discussed what England is I would like to end with what England isn’t. England is not centred around ethnicity or race - it is centred around identity. Resentment of our friends to the North and West is becoming more common because they have devolved politics and we do not. It is pertinent to remind those who might tend to denigrate our fellow Brits that the old English Parliament in Westminster cannot helpfully serve those who live so far away. The alternative seats of power in Cardiff, Belfast and Edinburgh are not there to promote provincial nationalism at the expense of subsuming Englishness into Britishness. It is simply an attempt to bring politics closer to these people. We English (in the South at least) are lucky to have Westminster so near and we cannot know what it feels like to be ruled from a Parliament so far away from your home.
Finally, questions over English identity must never be allowed to spill over into questions of race. The English are not a race. We are as artificially thrown together as any nation. Our strength is that we can still forge a great society without the need for ethnic bonds. We are freed from primal politics and instead can look forward to rational politics. Some on the fringe may argue that Englishness means being of some particular racial background - this I wholly reject. We English are a people but not a race. We are inclusive to anyone who agrees with our basic values.
The great symbol of England that remains is our football team and I am a passionate fan. I expect I will still feel the desire to weep when England are knocked out of the 2060 World Cup Finals. I’m sure that then, as now, I will be cheering on a team with a variety of ethnic backgrounds - all proudly English. England is a land of inclusion, a land comfortable with the idea of mixing various cultures, a land with pride in humanity and not pre-occupied with racial origins.
Simon Maine is a student of politics and philosophy at St. Anne’s College, Oxford University.
Share This
Simon’s thesis of an English inclusive identity is one that few would disagree with. But I for one feel he is hard on English claims for parity with Scotland and Wales with regard to an English Parliament as a focus for an English national identity. It is apparently quite Ok for the Scots and Welsh to have parliamentary bodies but not the English. Why? To maintain that the “Celts” deserve their own parliaments because they are geographically remote from Westminster is a nonsense. Perhaps we should run that argument by the English in Cumbria and the North East who watch their Scottish neighbours enjoying the full fruits of devolution. Simon’s essay strikes me as an apologia for the Union rather than a view of Englishness; we in England should sacifice our legitimate claims to nationhood in the interests of maintaining a Union which appears to exist to primarily benefit the Scots and Welsh. A curious kind of Englishness is that….
Greg
23 Sep 07 at 3:23 am
I have to disagree that the Romans set Englands land boundaries, did the Romans not build Hadrians wall to keep the raiding Picts out, yet the land border of England stretches some 13 miles north, and Offa the Saxon King built the Dyke that seperated England from Wales. There is not one European nation that did not have fuedal kingdoms fighting for land and rights the Germanic tribes for instance but that does not stop Germany from being the German nation but Mr Maine would have us believe because the Saxon Kings were disunited until Athlestan became King of all England that somehow we are not a race nor in his eyes an ethnicity, we English are expected to accept the term invasion as if the Normans swamped England, nothing could be further from the Truth once William had the crown of England only 5000 French settled and were mostly to become William’s men in authority, if it was an invasion how to this day are we still speaking English and not French. My contenction is this if an immigrant has a family that lives in England for 3 generations then the 3rd generation are naturalised English, if we take that England was united in 956ad then those from around 1010ad can call themselves English because they are indeed of the land of England. May I remind Simon Maine that an English Parliament has not stood since 1707 some 300 years so how could an English Parliament help those so far away indeed it would not be part of an English Parliament’s remit to help those in Scotland and Wales. I do lament the passing of England as a political entity because as it stands now England is being ruled by the British Govt that treats England as the last colony of the British Empire, and exactly what is it that we are creating better? Health aparthied? Education aparthied? If it means the Union fails because the English are fed up with British rule then good riddance
Barry (The Elder)
23 Sep 07 at 5:31 am
I’ve just got back from Canada so I have to disagree with the statement that England is as artificial a creation as any nation can be.
Clearly Englishness is about race for some people, whether rightly or wrongly (wrongly in my view). And it’s most certainly about ethnicity if we are talking about common culture, language and heritage. This ethnic sense of Englishness contributes towards a more plural sense of English identity that hopefully anyone can feel a part of, or aspire to be part of.
Gareth Young
23 Sep 07 at 7:55 am
A bit like the Curates Egg with the bad bits being total crap.
An example is reproduced below below.
“The alternative seats of power in Cardiff, Belfast and Edinburgh are not there to promote provincial nationalism at the expense of subsuming Englishness into Britishness. It is simply an attempt to bring politics closer to these people. We English (in the South at least) are lucky to have Westminster so near and we cannot know what it feels like to be ruled from a Parliament so far away from your home.”
This is what the result has been, exactly that, nationalism rising in Scotland and Wales is the direct result of devolving power to only two of the constituent parts of the UK. Being English I do not consider myself lucky to have Westminster so near to me, it has brought me nothing but grief for the past ten years including being ruled by a Dictator who has no mandate in my country.
Len Welsh
23 Sep 07 at 11:33 am
Horrid. Simon Maine is PC to the point of making me feel quite ill and certainly not committed to equality within the UK.
ALL nations are “artificial”. That’s what nations are. Nature does not maketh nations.
Is Mr Maine saying that the English fail some kind of “purity” test to qualify for fully accepted nationhood, for equality with Scotland and Wales? Is there some kind of covert racist, elitist dogma being spouted here?
Prior to devolution, the Scots and Welsh had (and I believe STILL have) Secretaries of State at Westminster - but England did not and DOES not. Health apartheid, the West Lothian Question, etc, are simply unjust.
Mr Maine presents himself as being patronising, snobbish, smug, and completely uncaring.
Maria Scott
23 Sep 07 at 4:44 pm
As much as I enjoy abuse rather than reasoned argument I feel I must clear myself.
“England is as artificial a creation as any nation can be”
This line was my equivalent of this line,
“ALL nations are’artificial’. That’s what nations are. Nature does not maketh nations.”
I’m not singling out England - my opinion is not confined to England - it applies equally to ALL nations. If you ask why I pick on England here then you need only look at the title of this web site.
I can’t seem to present an argument about English inclusiveness without being accused of self-loathing and abasement. So here’s the real gist:
Nationhood politics is largely petty and covers up a much more fundamentally important political issue. The people need to become more involved in their own government but it is arbitrary to stop at an English Parliament. Government should go where it is required, irrespective of artificial borders.
Just because my experience of England is different from yours, it does not automatically make you right. Discussion is needed here - not flippant abuse.
Simon Maine
23 Sep 07 at 6:08 pm
Simon, I’m with you on inclusivity, of course - but I am confused about the implications of devolution as you have it in the essay that we should be greatful that Westminster is so close.
Are you saying that a devolved parliament for England is not needed? Here I would disagree - it is the necessary solution to both the West Lothian question and the issue of English national identity.
In the past, the British government has relied upon MPs with constituencies in Scotland to pass legislation that relates to the affairs of England and Wales.
The nationalisms of Scotland and Wales are not exclusive or vindictive - indeed, both Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party support devolution for England. I think that if an English parliament were to be established, it would lead to the strenghtening of a civic national identity in England.
Charlie Marks
23 Sep 07 at 7:12 pm
An English parliament would be the single biggest step we could take towards a civic and inclusive English identity. Everyone regardless of race or religion would become a stakeholder in England, a participant through the ballot box.
At the moment people on the left tend to reject and object to any political expression of Englishness, then they complain when people express a tribal or ethnic version of Englishness. Is Englishness only to be expressed in moments of tribalism during football and rugby matches, or are we entitled to an English nationalism - a political expression of Englishness - like any other country on this planet? I fail to see why not.
Gareth Young
23 Sep 07 at 7:21 pm
I would like to echo the sentiment echoed by Gareth and most of the others here.
Frankly, I am sick of people discussing England by a completely different set of rules to everywhere else, and in some kind of separate context.
Regardless of any accademic waffle, what it really comes down to is quite simple. Any nation should have the right to govern itself (a number of wars have been fought for exactly this reason, usually, ironically, with England at the heart of the fight for those nation’s freedom).
I would also dispute a statement that I think Simon hasn’t thgouth through properly, namely….
“Government should go where it is required, irrespective of artificial borders. ”
I would contend that Government should go where it serves it’s people most effectivley. This is not the same thing as “requirement” can be down to subjective opinion, such as Tony Blair’s half-Scottish opinion on where it’s “required” at the moment (and now Gordon Brown’s). this is NOT where it’s serving the majority of it’s people best.
This is not ‘abuse’ by the way, as far as I’m concerned it is “reasoned agument”. The only lack of reasoned argument I have seen on this thread so far is yours Simon.
Neal Bedwell
24 Sep 07 at 2:02 am
I should also add that ‘inclusiveness’ is a complete non-issue in the first place. England is the place you see marked on any decent map of the UK. The English are the people who live there (by definition!). This is the same for every ‘country’ in the world. Why are you bothering to write an article to tell us all that ?
I don’t see the Scots or Welsh writing getting hung-up on inclusiveness. They simply focus more on telling themselves and everyone else what they are and how great they think it is to be that. Believe me, I live in Wales, so I know.
Let’s all stop analysing what we are, or should be, or used to be, or might be, and start putting are energy into just ENJOYING being it, and promoting it.
P.S.
24 Sep 07 at 2:20 am
“Flippant abuse”? I do not feel “flippant” in any way about you or your ilk, Mr Maine. As somebody who depends on the NHS and public sector in England, as somebody on under £18,000 per year with two sons - who sees much more being spent on education elsewhere, I certainly feel in no way light hearted about this.
My vocabulary may not be up to your standard, and I may have a tendancy to insult, but my insults are heartfelt and my views and ways of putting them across every bit as relevant as yours and the type of smug, ill-concealed anti-English posturing you favour.
Maria Scott
24 Sep 07 at 4:16 am
Charlie I don’t think it is very difficult to find-out the real reason why the SNP and Plaid are so much in favour of an English Parliament. It is because they see it as a very likely cause of the break-up of the United Kingdom. Mr Salmond and company does have an ulterior motive.
Barry
4 Oct 07 at 7:57 pm
Ah, but Barry — both Plaid and the SNP openly proclaim their intentions. They are not ulterior motives, then.
I don’t know how much the break-up of the UK bothers you, but I would welcome a peaceful end to Britain.
I too see an English parliament as the likely cause of this break-up.
Charlie Marks
6 Oct 07 at 5:51 pm
It would bother me as I consider myself to be British and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NI to be my country. No-one has the right to take it away from me. I would like to see Folyrood (the EU’s trojan horse in Britain) scrapped along with that pathetic ‘assembly’ in Cardiff. We don’t need any of these tinpot ‘parliaments’ We need, instead, a strengthening of Westminster by removing Britain from the EU and not falling into the EU’s trap which is what devolution entails.
Barry
26 Oct 07 at 8:20 pm
Barry, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is not a nation, it is a multinational state. You have every right to identify as British, but you must respect the democratic decisions made to have devolved institutions.
The Scottish Parliament and the Assemblies in Wales and Northern Ireland mean a great deal — just as an English parliament would mean a great deal to the people of England.
If an independent England were to emerge in the next few years, it would not be in the European Union. I doubt that any of the nationalist parties in the other nations of the Anglo-Celtic Isles would get far in arguing for the replacement of Westminster rule with diktat from Brussells!
Charlie Marks
27 Oct 07 at 8:58 pm
Barrie, you have every right to self-identify as British but the UK of GB and NI is not a nation, it is a multinational state.
The people of Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, are better off with the small degree of self-government they have, and it would mean much to the people of England if we could have an English parliament and finally put to bed the relic that is the British state.
I doubt if the nationalists in Scotland and Wales would get far arguing for rule from Westminster to be replaced by diktat from Brussels! Certainly, if an independent England were to emerge in the next few years it would not be in the European Union.
Charlie Marks
27 Oct 07 at 9:04 pm
Britain is a country and there is no way I want it to split apart. For 300 odd years we have had a shared history and that gives me my British identity. All you separatists are traitors who are only doing the EU’s work for it.
The SNP and Plaid Islam argue for ‘independence’ in the EU.
Barry
29 Jul 08 at 5:08 am