My Own Personal Brand Of Patriotism

St. George's Day. As any one of my personal acquaintance would know, this is not a day I respect. On many subjects I am a rational person with a healthy scepticism. I like evidence-based science. I find religion fascinating but ultimately false. I enjoy reasoned arguments from others and like to try and keep my beliefs consistent. But on the subject of patriotism, reason leaves me and is instead replaced with the sort of passion others seem to reserve for their deities.

And my form of patriotism is not one rooted in popular culture. It's my own brand mixing royalism, unionism and personal loyalty to strangers. I no longer attempt to argue against English nationalism as I once did. Nor do I argue against republicanism, given I find many arguments in favour of it both logical and compelling. But I also do not expect anyone to ever change my own beliefs on the matter.

I find English nationalism dull and and without romance. It seems unfocussed and, occasionally, loutish. I don't mean to say people who consider themselves "English" are louts, but that often the expression of nationalism that is most often encountered (i.e. through sport) is loutish.

And I find republicanism to often be less expressed in the logic that is so compelling and more about a personal hatred of Her Majesty and her family. The snide comments on Twitter I often see RT'd by @RepublicStaff are indicative of this nastiness and it leaves me cold. Furthermore, republicanism shares English nationalism's unromantic nature.

Perhaps it's my love of fantasy, my interest in British (plus earlier English and Scottish) history or a very human need for a little bit of irrationality in one's life, but I love the monarchy. I love the United Kingdom. I find a great deal of comfort in knowing the Queen is on her throne and she reigns over us. I like the pomp, I like the chivalry and I like the notion of personal loyalty to someone.

In my job I encounter so many unreasonable, impolite and, often, duplicitous people that I find I crave something as simple as being unfailingly loyal to another person without expecting anything in return. It's seems so pure and honourable to keep one's word to another; like something from that better part of our nature that we so often don't get to show.

I am personally loyal to Her Majesty and her heirs, to her United Kingdom and it's territories. I do not accept that patriotism means waving a big flag, celebrating some long dead saint or dying in some politically motivated war. It's not about "shared culture", where you are born or some historic borders. It's about loyalty, honour, decency and fellowship. To me it's about progress, innovation and goodwill.

Whatever happens to this country, whether it remains at it is or becomes an English Republic, I will remain a loyal British subject. Unwavering in my personal loyalty but respectful of other's beliefs.

St. George means nothing to me, but if he so moves you to acts of passion then far be it from me to try and dissuade you. But I'm more moved by things such as this excellent Youtube video I posted about yesterday:



If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Disturbing Images From The Western World

Whilst the world's attention is focussed on the horrific but also exhilarating revolutions occurring in the Arab countries of the Middle East and North Africa, other equally disturbing images have been coming from within our own midst.

Hate Comes To Orange County



I find this video almost too upsetting to watch. Muslims families being tormented and insulted by protesters waving American flags whilst elected US officials spread hate among the crowd. I can almost hear the echoes of the fascists in the 1930s and their anti-Jewish rhetoric. Awful stuff, and we are just not condemning this enough.

EDL Thugs

The English Defense League. It's everything I've worried about when I've spoken about English nationalism on here before. Now they bring in violent unionist imagery (no, I do not understand that either, we're English but we support the British cause? Hmm...). They are just a bunch of thuggish little boys terrified of the Other. We must oppose them thoroughly and consistently wherever they go.

The German Question

German interior minister reopens bitter row over Muslim integration. Certainly, Islam is not part of traditional German culture. Nothing controversial there, that's just a historical statement. But I don't think that's what is being said here, and we all know that. The wink, wink, nod, nod of the anti-Islam crowd is almost as disgusting as what they actually say.

"To say that Islam belongs in Germany is not a fact supported by history."

Well some interpretations of German history might suggest Jews don't belong in Germany (they've spent more time as pariahs than they have as equal German citizens throughout Germany's complex history). But you wouldn't say that because that would sound pretty damn disturbing. Are we to get rid of everyone in our countries whose presence isn't backed up by history? And what history are we talking about? Modern or ancient? Perhaps the German people don't belong there either as my memory of Germany 65 million years ago certainly doesn't back up their claim on residence either. History is useful, interesting and complicated. But it's not a Bible. We make our own destinies whilst learning from our history. But Germany seems to be just repeating the same old mistakes.

It's time we stood up and said no more. I'm no fan of Islam. To me it's just another silly religion. But that doesn't mean I do not support Muslims rights to their beliefs nor that I think they are some holier than thou angels without any issues themselves. But we must have a frank and honest debate not a "Them and us" one. The West needs to wake up to the hate it is brewing before it's too late.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Flags, Flags, Flags

Late last year I wrote "For The Flag", at which I bemoaned the upcoming World Cup as I knew it mean seeing two things I hate: 1) disrespectful display of flags and 2) St George's crosses everywhere. (Declaration of interest... I'm human first, British second, Kentish on the outside and sometimes, when it suits, European. English does not feature)

I was not wrong. I have returned to my home town since that post (a move that I must say is possibly the best decision ever made) and here, in deepest, darkest Kent, English patriotism is strong.

Sadly this patriotism is not of the deep, respectful and reserved kind. No British stiff upper lip allowed. This is the loud American patriotism that believes displaying the flag at every available opportunity is the only way to be patriotic. Sadly the American respect of their flag has not transferred across at the same time.

When did people start thinking that they could be proud of the flag and deface it with letters and graphics at the same time? It irks me greatly. I know, I know. People are free to treat their property however they like, and to pledge allegiance to whatever "country" they so wish. But as I said in For The Flag, that doesn't mean I can't moan about it.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Scotland Needs Champions. Don't We All?

Nationalism is such a regressive, backward political philosophy. There's nothing wrong with thinking people within a "nation" should have rights to govern themselves. There's nothing wrong with believing in nurturing and maintaining "national" traditions. These are worthy ideals. But nationalism often, if not always, brings those philosophies and mixes them up with a sense of "us against them", of a "fight" with some external other.

You need look no further than the Scottish National Party to see high ideals and low brow prejudices sitting side by side. The SNP espouses progressive economic and social policies alongside it's calls for independence. These calls draw not upon sensible economics nor upon a desire to free themselves from some despotic British dictatorship (our Prime Minister, after all, is currently a Scot!). No, they draw upon a deep racist spirit held within the hearts of quite a few SNP voters against their "ancient foes", the English.

You might laugh at that, but it is undeniably true. Speak to a few Scottish people and eventually you will find a couple whose hatred for the English is so strong it is quite disturbing.

Any party whose base is thus constructed is not one any sane, reasonable person should support.

It's no different down south. The English nationalists again attempt to wrap themselves up with the usual reasonable policies. But underneath you find their true feelings.

There is a dark soul at the centre of nationalist movements, one that speaks to humanity's primal instincts to hide from change, to fight "the other" and to defend their territory for no other reason than because it's their territory.

We surely must aspire to more than this, to solving our problems, to moving forward and changing. Our world is messed up, lives wasted slaving for corporate masters, true freedom remains ever elusive. We cannot face these issues without forgetting old rivalries, working together and overcoming our irrational minds.

Vote not for people who speak to the past, but to those who speak to the future.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

For The Flag

This country is full of, so-called, "patriots". Most of them don't even appear not know which country they are in (i.e. the United Kingdom NOT England) but regardless of that I'm flabbergasted at the disrespect these people show to even their own flags.

There's a pub near me, thankfully closing down soon, called the Royal George. Outside they fly, quelle and surprise, the St George's flag. Now I'm putting aside my unionism for this post so no insults from me here. But these flags are shabby, dirty and ill cared for. I have to ask: why bother? What is the point of making a big show of having flags, things which most countries have laws protecting how they are displayed, and then not caring for them. It's hardly patriotic, but based on my travels around London and Kent the flags there are actually far better than some. I've been past some pubs that actually have HOLES in their flags.

The same was true for the Greenwich Police Station who, until recently, was flying a dirty, holed Union flag. This is a Government body, and they can't even fly a decent looking flag. If there was some deeply interesting history behind the flag, perhaps they can be forgiven, but I doubt that was the case.

I know, we don't have a tradition of respecting our flags like America does nor do we have any rules or regulations governing civilian use of flags. In fact the Union flag isn't even, officially, the flag of the country (it is officially a flag of the monarch). But still... if one is to claim to be patriotic (which I think flying a flag is a statement of) why don't people care for them more?

Let's look at two examples from yesterdays "English" "Defence" League protest.

Firstly we have a bizarrely featured Union flag. Let us first ignore the strange juxtaposition of "English" and "Union flag" and instead focus on how they are holding that flag. Surely, if these folks are so passionate about their country, they would be treating the flag a little less like a "Happy Birthday" banner flying off a motorway bridge?

Then we have these rather delightful fellows holding DEFACED St George's flags. These people need to learn about flag poles. But then again this might involve some sort of education which they are clearly lacking.

Despite my rather irrational, and rabid, dislike for the St. George's flag, I'm not looking forward to the World Cup. Around that time people will drape St George's flags out their windows onto dirty walls, hang them from their cars and generally cause me to grow increasingly angry at their obviously FAUX patriotism.

I know, this is very petty stuff. But this a blog and a blog's main raison d'etre is the petty stuff not fit to print! Honestly folks... if you are going to do something, at least do it properly!!

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Some People Love The Mayor Of Doncaster

But I don't know why.

I've said before I have concerns over the values the English Democrats attach themselves to (such as the racist policies of the England First Party as per my post here).

Now my least favourite Mayor, Peter Davies (see my concerns about him here and here) of the English Democrats has come out with perhaps the most startlingly awful statement of the month.

"The one thing to be said about the Taliban is that they do have an ordered society of some sort and that they don't have hundreds of cases of children under threat of abuse from violent parents, as we have in Doncaster."

What on Earth is he talking about? The Taliban are INFAMOUS for their child abuse. Check out their abuse of boys (who they train to DIE). Oh and their wonderful ordered society:

In October 2001 Oxfam International reported that:

* Over 750,000 Afghans (including children) are disabled due to mines and high incidence of polio
* Clean water is available to less than 15 percent of the population
* The immunization rate among children is as low as 10 percent
* There is a high incidence of mental health problems, particularly among women Source

We do have social problems in this country, but suggesting that the Taliban would make a better job of things is an insult to decency, humanity and all that is good. Our troops are out there fighting these guys and he's back here suggesting they aren't all that bad. It's a bit like someone suggesting during the Second World War that "at least the Nazi's would make the trains run on time". Perhaps he might try to find examples of decent nations who have a better way of doing things, perhaps in Europe for instance? Oh sorry, no he'd rather suggest we all turn into fundamentalist Muslims than suggest something good might be found on our own Continent.

And worse he is no better than any other politician with his spinning. See this article from the Daily Mail in which it is claimed his anti-political correctness drive (which sounds just as pointless as any diversity drive would be) identified an "ethnic minorities welfare rights service " that could be culled. Actually that service was scrapped three years ago, as revealed by the Private Eye, well before Mr Davies came along and began his bizarre populist and reactionary stint as Mayor.

I just hope I'm wrong about the English nationalists liking this guy, because if I'm not then they really are screwed.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

English Democrat Mayor U Turn

Amazing how quickly politicians go from radicalism to keeping the status quo. The English Democrat Mayor of Doncaster, Peter Davies, has gone back on his plan to cut funding for pride. Whilst I don't applaud the decision to fund pride (I believe all suck frivolous things should be beyond the scope of Government, including any "national" parade), I do laugh at how quickly this one turned. Next we'll have the new BNP Euro MEPs voting for equal rights measures.

This, I think, disproves the idea that Mr Davies is not homophobic. I originally felt he was, based on the wording of his statement to stop the funding. If the cut had been because he believed in a reduced Government role in such community events and value for money for the tax payer, then he would not have gone back on it. Instead when he found that such events would benefit local businesses (if not all taxpayers) then he decided to continue the funding and forget his obvious dislike for the GLBT community in the name of more money for local business. Disgusting. Not only do taxpayers have to fund events they might not agree with (such as a St George's Day parade!) they now get to subsidise local businesses they might now wish to support!!

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from

his wishlist

The English Democrats: Reasonable Nationalists?

The English Democrats say on their FAQs:

Politically our policies are neither left nor right. We have a commitment to a mixed economy, but also require protection for the vulnerable and would advocate developing public ownership policies for key strategic industries. We are implacably opposed to globalisation, economies based on "cheap labour" and the offshoring of English jobs.

That is certainly laudable. They also state:

"English & Proud" - that's what English Democrats are - why should it be implied that you are a "Bigot" or a "Racist" simply because you are proud of your Country - we English Democrats are simply pro English.

Here, here I say. Being patriotic for one's country (even if I don't agree on the semantics here) should never be considered racist. But then, why are they allowing the England First Party to hang out at their conferences?

England First has as their first part of their brief/manifesto (sic) the following:

1. Stop all further immigration and start a programme of voluntary repatriation of non-European immigrants back to their lands of ancestral origin

Erm... that's racist (or racialist depending on how one likes to use these words). That's really racist. "Ancestral origin"? There's being against multiculturalism and then there's being against people because of their "origin". They are rather different things both in reality and in moral terms.

But not only does the England First Party offer it's support to the English Democrat candidates in some elections (something the EDs are powerless to stop), it also is allowed to speak at ED conferences. They even get photo ops with the parties European election candidates!! See here for pictures!

I hope the EDs have issued a firm denunciation of the close relations with the EFP, otherwise their claims to be tolerant English patriots who are neither of the left or right spectrum's of politics are really very hollow indeed.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

English Democrats: BNP Lite

You know I don't agree with taxpayers money being used on frivolous things (such as gay pride parades) so you might think that when the newly elected Mayor of Doncaster said he was withdrawing funding from gay pride I would be quite pleased. Sadly his entire manner and the policies of his nationalist party, the English Democrats, suggest that this was not a decision brought about because of economical shrewdness but from a prejudiced position. And a good decision made for bad reasons is not something we should applaud as such bad reasoning can have ramifications in the future that are not so acceptable.

Peter Davies, of the English Democrats, said: "My policy on gays and lesbians is very simple.

"I don't think councils should be spending money on them parading through town advertising their sexuality."

Nice way of putting it there. Why did he not say "My policy on community events in Doncaster is that they are for the organisers and supporters to fund, whilst my administration has a duty to ensure taxpayers money is only spent on things that are practical and beneficial for all the residents of Doncaster"? Because he is not formulating a sound policy but scoring political points with his core constituency of backward, regressive idiots.

I look forward to him NOT paying for the almost inevitable St. Georges Day parade next year. Because otherwise this decision will be nothing but a case of homophobia rather than sound governance.

Here's a hint for English "Democrats". Next time don't have a policy on "gays and lesbians". Why the heck would you need one unless you were either biased towards or against them? Personally I think political parties should start treating the GLBT community as ordinary citizens and get over all this stupid posturing.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

March For England Seems To Not Understand Respecting Our Troops

When our troops came under verbal attack from some radical anti-war protesters in Luton recently, they maintained their professionalism and dignity in the face of the insults and taunts of the protesters. Some who had come to the parade to pay tribute to the troops were, somewhat understandably, undignified in their response but the police managed to maintain some form of order. That day served as a reminder of the professionalism of our armed forces and police, and our protection of the rights of free speech for all (something we need to see more of admittedly!) no matter how repugnant that speech is.

Alas, some organisation named "March For England" organised a peaceful protest that got out of hand over the weekend in Luton, with slogans such as "No Sharia Law in the UK" and "Respect our Troops". Whilst I very much agree with the sentiments, I somewhat think the organisers missed out on one major thing: this sort of protest is bound to draw in the wrong elements and in so doing bring dishonour upon the troops whom they claim to be defending.

And some of the protesters this time certainly sound like lovely representatives for the cause of respecting our troops:

"Groups of young men in balaclavas and England shirts chanted outside the city centre and one balacava-clad protester held a Rottweiler on a chain, while others clashed with police in riot gear. One Asian man was hit across the face with a banner and left with a bloody nose."

Mmm... English nationalism at it's best. These people should be roundly condemned for allowing this sort of a mess to be carried out in the name of respecting our troops! It is a hideous insult to their courage and reserve.

Our British soldiers deserve a better tribute than this rabble of "English" people.

If we are to stand up for the rights of our decent citizens and our honourable troops then we must do so peacefully, decently and with integrity. If we are to defend our way of life from sharia law, and religious stupidity, we must do so through the proper channels (the law, our Government and the way our society works). We must integrate our communities and not allow differences which sow terror and violence among our population.

Riots, racist attacks and disorder serve only to bring our country into disrepute, and stoke tensions in areas that need few reasons for outbreaks of violence. We must engage with our minority communities and bring them into our society and not show them reasons to avoid integration such as has been done here.

How can we imagine that by showing our way of life to be full of hate and violence we are going to encourage the young minority community member to engage with mainstream society? I'm not a Christian but surely reaching out with love (not tolerance, we don't wish to tolerate people, we need to embrace them as our neighbours!) is far better than doing so with hate.

We might achieve a little more.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Don't Call Me English

I continue my fight to be British, something that is increasingly hard to be here in London. There are so many "colonials" here who, not knowing any better, seem to feel it's okay to call me "English" (plus of course most of the English folk too which is about 90% of the population even those of ethnic minority origins which really makes me laugh). Well it's not and I'm pretty quick to educate them in the subtle differences.

The biggest of course is about being patriotic. Self-confessed English people are, in my opinion, being traitorous towards Her Britannic Majesty. If the United Kingdom is one country under Queen Elizabeth II then that is good enough for me to consider myself British. Anything else is secessionist rebellion against the monarchy and as self confessed royalist I'll have nothing to do with that thank you very much.

What connects British people? A shared ruler, a shared political structure (being eroded now by devolution, alas) and a shared military. Not culture, which is what some English folk protest connects them. People seem to think being English means you share an exclusive culture with all the other folk who live in "England" as opposed to the cultures of the Scots or Welsh. This of course is a ludicrous delusion. I no more share my culture with someone from Yorkshire than I do with someone from northern France. I suspect I'd probably understand the French person better too (my French is rudimentary but better than my Tyke). If that is not the case, if they really don't think culture connects them then being English is quite pointless as there is no other sane reason for considering yourself English than as part of one nationality and culture. Thus Englishness is a defunct concept.

The most important point for me though is aspirational. Britishness is a concept open to interpretation, free of the thousands of years of history of any other and formed only over the last couple of hundred years. The concept of Britishness, to me anyway, is one of being unobtrusively patriotic (no American gushing over the flag, more a silent respect), of being polite to others, of being thoughtful and of keeping ones emotions in check as much as possible. The good old British stiff upper lip as it were. Sure it's impossible for any human to constantly maintain such a holier than thou demeanour. But it can't hurt to try.

Englishness seems more in line with ideas of Anglo-Saxon bravado and a certain lack of class in everyday interactions. Of thoughtlessness and of arrogance. The St Georges flag seems to me to represent everything that I hate in this country.

This story from the Titanic empathises everything I consider important about being British. In everything I do I aspire to meet the Captain's demand of "Be British, boys, be British."

I just wish more people did the same.

So feel free to call yourself English and lay claim to the violence and destruction of the Anglo Saxons. I prefer to believe in looking forward, of believing in unity against sedition or progress over longing for an imaginary past. So don't call me English and don't call this country England. Until the nationalists (and of course the disinterested masses) win, it remains the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Long may it remain so.

P.S. Why do Americans call the country England? Even at the time of the Revolution it was the Kingdom of Great Britain. Grr...

Rant Ends

Further Reading

The How to be British Collection (US Amazon)

The English Nation: The Great Myth (US Amazon)

The English Fallacy

As long term readers know I'm a Unionist. I believe that the concept of Englishness is false and the break up the Union would be a slap in the face to hundreds of years of history. My feelings were reaffirmed today in a strange roundabout way...

I went to Nottingham. Nottingham is about as different from London and Kent as is Scotland or Wales. They speak with a funny accent and have strange shops and listen to weird radio stations (Trent FM???). This whole obsession some people have with being English just seems so misplaced to me... what on Earth do I have in common with the people of Nottingham? Not much...

That's what I love about the UK... it's bloody diverse and only thing that holds us together is the fact we all live on the same group of islands. We work well together, even if we don't always get along.

The concept of England going it alone is based on the idea that there is such a thing as an "English" person, and that the "English" share a culture. But I say there is isn't. I'm Kentish. The people from Yorkshire are proud to be from Yorkshire. The people from Cornwall are Cornish. We all have different cultures, different ways of speaking and different outlooks on life.

So if England ever did gain it's independence from the Union, I'd be the first person calling for Kent to secede. Because if we are going to base our country on the concept of a "shared culture" rather than on a geographical reality (us all living on the same group of islands) then I want to be in a country with all the Kentish Men and Men of Kent not in "England" a place with too many cultures to count.