Democratically disadvantaged

I’m an English nationalist, oh not one of the jingoistic my country right or wrong types, just someone who believes that the best people to run England are the English, certainly not the British which is one of the reasons why I have such disdain for the UK parliament in Westminster, that and the suspicion that they are actually corrupt to the core.  Before 1998 though I was reasonable happy being British, that was the point at which the government granted devolution to the Scots and Welsh and gave them their own parliaments/assembly and allowed them total control over certain devolved affairs outside the control of Westminster. All fine and good you’d think however Westminster still made laws for the English and allowed MP’s from Scotland and Wales to vote on these laws, granted there aren’t a lot of them, but enough on occasions to swing a vote, that’s why we have university top up fees in England despite a majority of English MP’s voting against, the legislation passed because enough non English MP’s voted along with the government to introduce them.

Still to be English, now there’s a thing, for over 300 years subsumed by Britishness and now beginning to flower anew and now causing a major headache to those who like their solutions in a box.

Is it because we have had little practice at being proud Englishmen and women that some of us go completely over the top and veer into jingoism? Are we going to have to reinvent Englishness? I think we are, certainly amongst those who would purport to lead us.

There is still a general confusion in this land about just what we are, the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish don’t have a problem with this, but that’s because as minorities they weren’t expected to quite fit the mould into the mainstream anyway. Indeed when the English do show a bit of pride and act similarly to our close neighbours we are often derided for doing so by certain elements who can’t cope with national pride and equate it to imperialism/colonialism and seek to quash it by any means possible.

There’s a certain mindset that seeks out to remove all traces of pride from this land, a soldier with the word England tattooed on his arm is denied entry into the police force in case the tattoo offends. Parents are told not to fly the flag of St George or allow it on any part of their children’s clothing/equipment. The name of our country is an offence to some who actually live here! This is the magnitude of the problem we face; this is why Labour and other EUphiles were obsessed with regions as English national pride is in almost diametric opposition to their so called socialist/European values. So they seek to break us up into smaller more manageable (and controllable) units hoping to set us at each others throats rather than being the nation they fear above all others.

We have a long and hard journey ahead of us, the forces of repression are entrenched in all of the civil sectors and many of them hate England with a passion despite being English themselves, they are the ones who after years of deriding Britishness and trying to have the Union flag banned, now seek to promote a sanitised version of it in a one size fits all for the people of England. It’s with the young that we have to start, get to them before the state does, instil pride in their green and pleasant land and get them to believe that to be English is something worth being proud about. We need English history to be taught as a mandatory subject in schools dropping citizenship and the rest of the politically correct crap that fills their curriculum. And yes that history needs to be warts and all, but we can emphasise the good in such figures as Wilberforce, as well as our military heroes in Nelson and Wellington.

Despite their attempts to promote Britishness, I believe that many in the establishment realise “Britishness” is dead, recent polls suggest that more people who are English count themselves as English first rather than British. I suspect though that there are those out there who see Englishness as a threat similar to how they once saw Britishness and have made moves such as mass unrestricted immigration to try and change the very fabric of the indigenous population away from their roots only to have it thrown back in their faces as the one thing they feared, a rise in English nationalism has gone from strength to strength despite or perhaps because of their attempts to quash it. Yet still the establishment try to deride any English person who attempts to show a bit of pride in their nation. You see it during sporting occasions with disdainful comments about the English flag flying all over the place down to the calling of groups such as the EDL as being racist knuckledragging scum (simplistic and wrong), for daring to band together to fight something they see as a threat to their nation, a threat which is more terrifying, homophobic, misogynistic, far more insidious and ultimately far more fascistic than Nazism, a totalitarian belief system masquerading as a religion. Yet somehow they are wrong to point this out and say it has to be stopped by demonstrating, a civil right that used to be taken for granted (please spare me comments about them being violent, there have been no arrests of EDL members at their last 5 demo’s, they aren’t saints, but they are nothing like the media image either).

In the UK, only the English are derided for being patriotic and only the English are denied their own parliament.

Post navigation

44 comments for “Democratically disadvantaged

  1. ivan
    April 30, 2011 at 9:25 pm

    There are other nations of like mind and are now further along the road to recovery than England http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4734

  2. April 30, 2011 at 10:38 pm

    Agreed.

  3. WitteringWitney
    April 30, 2011 at 10:52 pm

    QM, I have great sympathy for that about which you complain – and yes, I too consider myself English before being British.

    The problem I have with the creation of an English Parliament at the present time is that to so do would just hasten what some refer to as the Balkanisation of the United Kingdom and would also, at the same time, hasten that for which the EU wishes, namely the regionalisation of the UK to fit into their NUTS programme.

    UKIP has what I believe to be a neat solution to the West Lothian Question which, in a nutshell, is for days to be set aside in the parliamentary calendar for national MPs to debate and decide on those matters relevant to them and other days to debate and decide on national matters, such as, for example, defence. This solution would also allow disbandment of the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly etc thus saving £millions as the buildings could be sold.

    However, this could only be instigated once we have left the EU….

    • JoolsB
      May 1, 2011 at 8:56 pm

      The Scots and Welsh are never going to allow the disbandment of their parliament/assembly. UKIP are kidding themselves on this one. It won’t happen and therefore the only solution is to give England parity with the rest of the UK, i.e. it’s own parliament. The ‘United Kingdom’ has already been broken up by the last British Government under Tony Blair, it was only England they tried to regionalise. Surely an English Government with MPs standing up for the interests of England only just as Welsh & Scottish MPs are allowed to do for theirs would surely make England stronger, especially as England on the whole is generally Eurosceptic as opposed to the Celts who are not.

    • Geoff, England
      May 1, 2011 at 9:04 pm

      One problem with UKIP’s suggestion is this. All Westminster MPs, regardless of where they have their constituencies, are elected as British MPs to a British parliament, on a British mandate and (I believe) take an oath to protect British interests (when they’re not selling out to Brussels). All this Britishness does not stop Scots/Welsh/NI MPs putting their own selfish national interests first, at Engalnd’s expense. On the other hand, MPs from England, who nearly always identify themselves as British rather than English, will always put British interests ahead of England’s need to be treated fairly.

      As Scotland’s parliament and Wales’s and Northern Ireland’s assemblies are here to stay, the only fair solution is to square the circle and give England her own parliament, with the people of Cornwall being given the choice of being part of an English parliament or having their own body.

      • Paul
        May 1, 2011 at 9:15 pm

        Geoff, England: As Scotland’s parliament and Wales’s and Northern Ireland’s assemblies are here to stay

        It would be an awful lot easier if the genie wasn’t out of that particular bottle from a unionist perspective.

        • Geoff, England
          May 1, 2011 at 9:42 pm

          Yes, it would have been easier if Blair and Brown had kept the genie in the bottle. I used to consider myself English first and British second, but I lost the second part of that a long time ago. I’m now a fully fledged independencenik and hope to see England free of the ‘U’K as well as the Franco-German Empire (sorry, European ‘Union’) and the ‘Common’wealth, three organisations that give England nothing but a hefty bill.

      • andy
        May 4, 2011 at 1:47 am

        how do i fit in as i,m half scottish

  4. john in cheshire
    April 30, 2011 at 10:57 pm

    The term British now has such strong connotations with the ethnics in our country that I disowned it several years ago. It was quite liberating actually, to finally recognise that I’m English and that is something to be proud of because we are different from most other nations and in many cases quite superior. No, I don’t think I’m jingoistic; rather suddenly I have recognised reality as opposed to the fantasy world that has been woven by the socialists over many years, that means we have to feel guilty about our past.

  5. May 1, 2011 at 12:12 am

    “Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.”
    – Mark Twain

    I think that is true no matter which country you live in.
    Just my opinion.

    • Geoff, England
      May 1, 2011 at 8:55 pm

      I’ll always support England, but I’ll never support the British government, because it doesn’t deserve it.

  6. auburn spaceman
    May 1, 2011 at 12:18 am

    “This solution would also allow disbandment of the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly etc thus saving £millions as the buildings could be sold.”

    It also instantly alienates most of the voters in Scotland and many of the voters in Wales, which is not “neat”, it’s daft. People there like their (semi) autonomy.

    If the UK has a future it’s as a federation. A self-governing “London Capital Territory”, a parliament for the rest of England, and full fiscal autonomy for Scotland.

    • WitteringWitney
      May 1, 2011 at 8:53 am

      But each nation would have its own parliament, but one based at Westminster. Local autonomy would be with local authorities who could be given tax raising powers so that they become virtually self-financing. It is worth noting that the amount raised in VAT is approximately the amount given to local authorities by central government in grants. Out of the EU we would not have VAT, hence a local sales/land value tax would not impose any additional financial hardship.

      Whats not to like?

      • May 1, 2011 at 7:14 pm

        “Whats not to like?”

        Err, the fact that no one in Scotland or Wales actually wants that. The fact that we’d be left with dual-mandate MPs, or MPs, that it could be argued, lacked a mandate for Scotland, Wales or England, because they were elected on a British manifesto. The fact that you’d be scrapping Scottish and Welsh self-government (or are you suggesting that 30ish MPs from Wales and 50ish MPs from Scotland, of different colours, can govern those nations?).

        • auburn spaceman
          May 2, 2011 at 12:38 pm

          ““Whats not to like?”

          Err, the fact that no one in Scotland or Wales actually wants that.”

          Exactly. Why is this so hard to understand? UKIP’s policy towards the devolved adminstrations is idiotic, and it winds me up no end. (I’m a member, in case it isn’t obvious.)

  7. May 1, 2011 at 5:29 am

    “We have a long and hard journey ahead of us, the forces of repression are entrenched in all of the civil sectors and many of them hate England with a passion despite being English themselves…”

    And more dangerous than these are the ones who don’t believe this themselves, but go along with the status quo for fear of their jobs. Because there’s more of them.

  8. William
    May 1, 2011 at 7:47 am

    I’m not European
    I’m not British
    I’m not English
    I’m not Cumbrian
    I’m not Lancastrian
    I’m not Barrovian
    I’m not my name
    I am a living breathing thinking human being who is done with labels.

    • bnzss
      May 1, 2011 at 6:57 pm

      ‘I’m not European
      I’m not British
      I’m not English
      I’m not Cumbrian
      I’m not Lancastrian
      I’m not Barrovian
      I’m not my name
      I am a living breathing thinking human being who is done with labels.’

      A sobering perspective, and one I personally think is correct.

      I’d first ask; why be proud of a nation? or a state? There is no particular reason except for the creation of a bogus artifice designed to embed loyalty into the population. Sure, it may not be particularly deliberate, but this is what it does. A sort of ancient version of the groupthink mentality.

      So while, in the context of the OP, the English ‘right’ to a Parliament along the lines of Wales, Scotland, et al, is all fine and dandy, it doesn’t really do anything except promote the ideology that we all ought to be proud of this particular geographic region for no real reason.

      • May 1, 2011 at 7:03 pm

        Magna Carta, Wilberforce, Cromwell, Henry 5th, Elizabeth I, Bill of Rights, The Blitz, Shakespeare, The Lake District, Agincourt, etc.
        If you cannot find anything in which to be proud of your country, you simply aren’t trying hard enough.
        No it’s not perfect, but it has a lot to be proud of and for.

        • bnzss
          May 1, 2011 at 7:11 pm

          And an equal amount to be ‘ashamed’ about (hey, you were the one who mentioned Wilberforce!). But, of course, I dissociate myself from the shame because I was not there to have any effect on it, so cannot be said to have anything in particular to be ashamed about as an ‘Englishman’ (or a ‘Briton’, or ‘Caucasian’). Bloodlines and the lottery of geography are inconsequential here; they hold no meaning except that which you put on them.

          So, given that I can quite easily say that anything ‘my’ country has done in the past has not had a jot to do with me, why should I be proud of it again?

          This isn’t an issue of pride or derision, I just don’t understand the rationale behind being proud of something so abstract and utterly divorced from what we as individuals do.

          • May 1, 2011 at 7:18 pm

            Oh yes, that’s why I believe history should be taught warts and all.
            But I take pride in my countries achievements, it’s beauty and its peoples willingness to take on impossible odds and win.
            I see nothing shameful in loving my country or being proud of its achievements. Nor am I dismissive of what individuals do or believe for themselves, their friends or their country.
            I don’t have a problem with the Cornish seeking self determination, point being the majority there aren’t, not yet anyway.
            Dave from the chipshop too has a right to self determination and if he chooses to do that as an Englishman or an individual that’s up to him too. People band together whether you like it or not, the English generally describe themselves as a nation albeit made up of individual English. But it comes down to a matter of choice in the endand the majority view themselves or label themselves English and seek to rule themselves.

          • bnzss
            May 1, 2011 at 7:42 pm

            But you would readily support the right of an Englishman to have power over another Englishman. This is no different from the EU having power over England, except in terms of scale. The effect, however, is identical.

            This ties in to the Cornwall question. Using this rationale, Cornwall does, of course, have a right to self-determination. As does Penzance. And Dave from the chip shop. Whichever way you cut it, the individual is what’s important, not where the Parliament happens to be.

        • William
          May 1, 2011 at 7:32 pm

          “If you cannot find anything in which to be proud of your country, you simply aren’t trying hard enough.”

          But as far as I can tell no human can choose where on the planet they are born so why should the man made country your mother gives birth in be automatically deemed to be worthy of your respect?

          I used to be a proud, Barrovian, Lancastrian, Briton (I have never regarded myself as a Cumbrian or a European) and latterly an Englander but once I discovered I am not my name I am a human being, all of these labels are rapidly losing all significance.

          As much as I love researching and studying historical writings etc it is a sobering thought that all that history has delivered the regime under which we all live.

          • May 1, 2011 at 7:35 pm

            Individual can achieve great things, but a group of individuals bound by a common ancestry and common traditions can achieve much, much more than the individual sum of its parts.
            That’s why the EU seek to divide the English.

    • harry
      May 1, 2011 at 7:15 pm

      its not what or who you think you are that matters its the way the country you are in treats you and if you are english in england that is without any respect at all.

      • William
        May 1, 2011 at 7:35 pm

        But only if you accept your label!

        • andy
          May 4, 2011 at 1:56 am

          it was the english who wanted to rule over scotland and wales and ireland in the first place so why all the bleating just because of their indipendanse.

          • May 4, 2011 at 6:24 am

            Nobodies bleating over their independence, we just don’t want them having any more say over purely English matters in a similar manner to how the English have no say over their devolved matters.
            Btw the English ended up running Scotland so to speak because the idiots made themselves bankrupt, look up Darien to see why.

  9. May 1, 2011 at 11:56 am

    Agree, especially about the long hard journey.

  10. May 1, 2011 at 12:16 pm

    Agreed Quiet Man.

    I too in recent years have been thinking of myself as English before British, and that is in part thanks to reading so many Scottish Blogs covering activities north of the wall. I found myself asking for the same.

    I do not think an English Parliament is the answer, I would like to see a UK wide referendum on whether to persist as the UK or to break apart, all sorts of decisions would need to be made following on from such a vote, not least as whether to remain in the EU… It is a subject with so many hypothetical’s that it is difficult to be concise.

    Unfortunately it will probably not happen in my life time, but it would make me happy to see it debated more openly, without the PC police screeching every time someone mentions England or decides to fly the St George Flag.

    • Paul
      May 1, 2011 at 7:16 pm

      Would you have a referendum on leaving the EU first? Once that is done, you could then look at whether the UK is still Unionist or whether each country prefers to go his or her own way.

      If any EU referendum ends up in people actively voting for EU membership though, we’re ballaxed.

  11. May 1, 2011 at 7:16 pm

    That’s great, Home-rule for England, even if English MP’s and Lords massively dominate the Houses of Parliament and the UK capital is England’s capital with the UK’s economy centralised around it. Poor England with no representation even if it does have the Bank of England, the Church of England, a Queen of England and numerous other English bodies.

    Yes if the English want their own parliament they should have it, that is democracy, but why in that case are so many English nationalists rabidly hostile to Cornish recognition and self-determination?

    • May 1, 2011 at 7:22 pm

      Because Cornwall is a county and few in Cornwall demand as yet autonomy.

      • Paul
        May 1, 2011 at 7:26 pm

        Mebyon Kernow have something like three members on their County Council out of a total of 123.

    • Geoff, England
      May 1, 2011 at 8:53 pm

      Queen of England? She’s also queen of the rest of the Divided Kingdom, not to mention Canada, Australia, New Zealand and a few other places dotted around the globe. Oh, and I’ve never heard her mention England by name, just like nobody else in the establishment says the word ‘England’. As for the Church of England, it might as well call itself the Church of Anywhere But England (and a church of any religion except Christianity).

      I don’t think many English nationalists are opposed to Cornish self-determination. At the risk of sounding smug, I’ll say that I’m not. Most of us simply aren’t aware of Cornwall’s exact status, so you’re being a bit judgemental there, I think.

    • auburn spaceman
      May 2, 2011 at 12:53 pm

      “Poor England with no representation even if it does have the Bank of England, the Church of England, a Queen of England and numerous other English bodies.”

      The Westminster government, the City of London and the Bank of England are an imperial project run on behalf of an international financial elite, and don’t in any way represent England or its people. Nicholas Shaxton’s book “Treasure Islands” explains this and the associated history pretty well, if you’re actually interested.

      The only institution you mentioned that is English in anything but name is the Church, and a combination of declining attendances and cultural Marxist entryism mean its relevance is marginal at best.

      So yes, home rule for England please.

      “why in that case are so many English nationalists rabidly hostile to Cornish recognition and self-determination?”

      Assuming that’s actually the case, why do you care? Mebyon Kernow’s election results suggest your problem is the hostility of voters in Cornwall, not “English nationalists”.

      • May 4, 2011 at 12:03 pm

        If we are going to judge nationalist movements by their results then the combined results of the English Democrats, England First and EDL don’t bode well for your cause (in so many ways) either.

        In Cornwall we have gathered a petition of 50,000 signatures calling for devolution. This followed opinion polls putting support for Cornish devolution at over 55%.

        Mebyon Kernow support the creation of a Cornish Assembly but also so do the Greens, Liberal Democrats and many independent councillors. Last year MP Dan Rogerson produced his Cornish Devolution Bill.

        Read more here at the website for the Cornish Constitutional Convention: http://www.cornishassembly.org/

  12. Revolution Harry
    May 1, 2011 at 8:19 pm

    “…but once I discovered I am not my name I am a human being…”

    You always were a human being and as a sovereign individual your name is a convenient way of identifying yourself and communicating with others. Just because there are some who seek to exploit this is no reason to dismiss it altogether.

    There are powerful and dark forces who wish to destroy all sense of nationality and yes, even race. We are not all the same, we are wonderfully different and this should be cherished and appreciated. In case you hadn’t noticed the English (and others) are being systematically destroyed. It’s a slow process but it’s happening all the same. The methods being pursued are many and varied but the result is the same. The English are every bit as worthy of celebration and protection as the Maori, the Mexican or the Moroccan.

    Much that was allegedly done in ‘our’ name was no such thing. They were done by and for the ruling elite and nothing has changed in that respect.

    • William
      May 1, 2011 at 9:18 pm

      I understand your point of view and your assessment of what you see before you.

      However I was brought up to believe I am inextricably linked with a name in a birth registry. This simply isn’t the case. I can use any word or sound to identify myself amongst other human beings. It doesn’t have to be the one I have had attached to me by my parents.

      We are all individual human beings which to me simply means ‘the same but different’ and this should be celebrated at every opportunity. We all exist in whatever world we build for ourselves and share time with other people and their worlds when it suits us.

      People fear individuality for many reasons. Slave masters fear it because it shows that the individual who is bigger than their space will be a threat to their assumed authority at some point.
      Slaves fear it because they fear the retribution of the slave master if they show any individuality.

      England is identified by a line on a map just as the county I ‘live in’ used to be called Lancashire until the boundary commission moved some lines on their maps and created Cumbria. I wasn’t consulted about this change.
      I didn’t change, the town I lived in didn’t move, but I was supposed to change my allegiance from Lancashire to Cumbria because of this moving line and was expected to regard myself as Cumbrian even though I was born in the county of Lancashire.
      If being Lancastrian rather than Cumbrian was more important to me I would have to move!

      Nothing any part of the state does in ‘our name’ is done for our benefit. The state has to go on getting bigger and more expensive. Its how states operate. Luckily they also collapse most unexpectedly as well.

  13. May 2, 2011 at 10:54 am

    For what it’s worth I consider myself either English, or increasingly, WAS – white anglo saxon. I lost the P as a kid.

    Reading the comments, as always, the argument is on process and how we will be governed.

    The real argument, at least as a stepping stone, should be about direct democracy. I don’t care whether the town council or the EU rule me I don’t want to be ruled. Ni Dieu Ni Maitre.

    Don’t like the EU? We should decide. The Justice Minister? We should decide. Balanced budget? We should decide. Car parking charges? We should decide. The cane? We shold decide.

    The issue is the agenda is set by and controlled by the corrupt elite. Changing the location or composition of the elite will change nothing.

    You probably know, or have at least read, the names of the French president, German chancellor and even the Polish prime minister or Hungarian what not. Does anyone recall the seeing the name of the Swiss president/PM? Probably not because the are not important. We should aspire to our politicians being unimportant.

  14. William
    May 2, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    “Does anyone recall the seeing the name of the Swiss president/PM? Probably not because the are not important.”

    Beautiful!

    • May 2, 2011 at 1:05 pm

      I hope you are not refering to the typos 🙂

      • William
        May 2, 2011 at 1:15 pm

        No Typos is one field of writing I excel in 😳

  15. David Capman
    June 12, 2011 at 8:53 am

    I have links to Scotland, South Wales and northern England, although I live on the South Coast. My time in Northern Ireland in memory seems more limited to tramping the fields with a wet, cold SLR weighing me down, or as an armoured steward at the traditional teenage Derry evening riots.

    Point being that with the much smaller populations of Scotland, Ulster and Wales is that it’s easier to generate what might represent a single national conciousness – albeit ones with significant anomalous content. (To understate it somewhat). Just speaking personally, I don’t think I’ve ever been in possession of, or could identify, what might be called a single English conciousness, which would be necessary for an ‘England’ in those terms to exist. The English – just from my observation – are tribally regional. Whether Northerners, West County, Southerners, Londoners, Anglians…

    As far as I can identify, ‘England’ becomes relevant when those regions need to gather to oppose an external threat. In todays terms, I think the threat is there but is more difficult to quantify because it seems to come more from Parliament, than an external agression or usurper. In that, I think the threat is genuine, because without it, I just don’t think people would be talking about ‘England’.

    Just my tuppence worth.

Comments are closed.