Comments on: Manifesto: New Englishness: Re-expressing the Relationship Between England and the UK

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:06:30 +0000

I am aware of the consequences, but I cannot see any alternative and I believe a federal Britain would be stronger than what we have now.

By: britologywatch

britologywatch — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:32:50 +0000

I’m in favour of an English parliament, too, so long as a large majority of the English support it, as you say they do. But the constitutional implications, indeed the consequences for the survival of the UK, are huge, as I’m sure you’re aware.

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 06:03:36 +0000

A long read, but there is only one solution to this problem.

Despite the enormous differences between rural Highlands and financial Edinburg: tourist North Wales and industrial south Wales, this Government decided to devolve power to the nation of Scotland and to the nation Wales.

The nation of England deserves nothing less and sixty-odd percent of English people demand it.

We could, a) reverse the devolution process to pre-1998 levels, b) devolve power to the County Councils (or Regional Assemblies) or c) create a Parliament for England that matches the powers held by Hollyrood.

The first is untenable, the second is demonstrably unpopular (78% against in the North East referendum), so that leaves us with an English Parliament, which is very popular.

If England needs to devolve more powers to the counties and cities, them that is a question the English Parliament alone should answer.

By: britologywatch

britologywatch — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:23:01 +0000

I agree that it’s not clear that No. 3 is working. Let’s put it this way: I think that No. 3 is more likely to happen, and arguably has happened to a greater extent in the past, if the emphasis is placed on in-coming cultures and people becoming an accepted part of English (Scottish, Welsh) life and society (and a process of mutual influence and change is allowed to take its course); rather than insisting that newcomers integrate with a Britishness that even British people (English, Scottish, Welsh, etc.) experience as artificial, dogmatic and pompous – and that newcomers do this almost as a condition of continuing to reside in the UK, before they’ve had a chance to integrate and fit in in a more natural way.

This is particularly the case with respect to the way it sets up an antagonism between ‘Britishness’ and dogmatic / devout Islam. We want instead to be thinking of how a distinctive English (Scottish, etc.) Islam can develop (and how we can allow English culture to be influenced by and open towards Islam, without necessarily embracing its fundamental tenets); rather than expecting Muslims’ primary allegiance to be to an ideal set of British values, instead of to their faith.

By: Winslie Gomez

Winslie Gomez — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:14:09 +0000

Thanks Britologywatch

I reject (2) as well but not so sure if (3) is working, subjective view of my meagre experience.
winslie

By: britologywatch

britologywatch — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:56:27 +0000

Good question! Inclusion gets closest. I think there are three kinds of multi-culturalism: 1) the ‘many-into-one’ model, which is the Britology / assimilation approach; 2) the ‘one-in-many’ model, which is the type of multi-culturalism that is under attack, from the Britologists, among others (the idea that multiple cultures can co-exist harmoniously alongside one another and be supported in their distinctness / separateness); and 3) [my preference] the ‘one-as-many’ model, which involves incorporating and embracing diversity in a mutually enriching and transforming way (British culture absorbs elements of in-coming cultures which also develop distinctive ‘British’ expressions).

By: Winslie Gomez

Winslie Gomez — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 08:37:04 +0000

Britologywatch,

Long read but got there in the end. Like the passion in you words;
quick question,

Inclusion or assimilation what do you advocate?
winslie