Britology Watch: Deconstructing \’British Values\’

26 September 2007

Forget Drake, It Was the Turks What Saved Us! Trevor Philips and the Human Rights and Equality Commission

Cor blimey, I never knew that! Nearly escaped my attention amid all the hoo-ha surrounding Mealybland’s (sorry, Miliband’s) exposition of the ‘new wave’ of New Labour foreign policy yesterday. In a fringe meeting at the Labour conference, Trevor Philips – the head of the new Human Rights and Equality Commission – was advocating that we re-write our British (yes, British) history to bring out more strongly certain strands that have been overlooked, e.g. the long-term contribution made by Muslims. For instance, did you know that the real heroes and saviours in the defeat of the Armada were the Muslim Turks, who held up the Armada at the request of Elizabeth I. ‘Zounds, chaps; well we were b******d if we were going to rush a decent game of bowls (or should that be boules, Mr Philips?)!’

Now, I’m all in favour of including Islam and Muslims as an integral part of our understanding of modern Britain and modern England. In fact, I’m one of the first to react knee-jerk-fashion whenever I catch the putrid scent of Islamophobia (see other postings in this blog). But apparently, according to Mr Philips, we need to re-write and re-tell our whole history (by which he means British history, of course) to ensure Muslims are comprehensively included in that (are we going to do the same for the Jews, too?).

Fair enough that real contributions to British life or even military victories should be recognised: credit where credit’s due. But, for a start, I thought the PC cohorts had already been re-telling British history so that it brought out previously ‘under-emphasised’ aspects, such as the role of women and the history of Britain’s ethnic minorities. Do we a need a new revisionist history to revise the last revisionist history? Do we really need an ‘official’ British national history at all – a national story and myth, which is surely just an anachronistic re-arranging of the past to suit present political objectives and nation building? To be truly of use to us and to understand where we are now, what we really need is a completely open-minded, objective approach to history, so that no inconvenient truths and legacies that persist into the present can be suppressed?

Mr Philips’ new history is really about forging a new Britain for the present and future. Apparently, population changes and immigration are happening at such a rate that, for Mr Philips, there is “no going back” (er, to what, to a historically grounded sense of English identity and nationhood?) and you can no longer assume that people will inherit the values that bound the country together.

So, instead, there has to be a new formulation of values, including in a written constitution. But these are not abstract values, such as the ‘British values’ as advocated by a Blair or Brown: ‘freedom’, for instance, which is a value common to the whole of humanity not just Britain (I know what he means, but it’s a bit dodgy to imply that freedom is an abstract quality). No, what he’s talking about is: “a more explicit set of understandings which we can all share about how we treat each other and talk to each other and they have to be based on real values”. To explain what he means by real, he goes on to say that if these values were set out in a written constitution, they would have to be “an expression which is native and right for us”.

Well, his ‘explicit set of understandings’ sound like political correctness and imposed liberal orthodoxy to me. And, as for the native expression of real values, it is laudable that he’s trying to move away from the in fact highly abstract nature of ‘British values’ as generally propounded. But what does he mean? He doesn’t mean ‘native’ in the sense of the real ‘natives’ of Britain: the English, Scots, Welsh and Irish. He means British: British as reflecting the ‘authentic’ (revised) history of this land, which is in fact the ‘expression’ of a New Britain (New Labour New Britain) to be created: a united nation, with a single, official history; multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, multi-faith; with no special privilege or recognition (even historical – especially historical) accorded to any group – such as the English, for instance.

Well, it was the Muslim Turks what saved us, after all!

Advertisements

3 Comments »

  1. I’m reading George Orwell 1984 at the moment. The comparisons are somewhat unnerving….

    Comment by Jamie — 27 September 2007 @ 10.02 pm | Reply

  2. We do have a Constitution,
    what is happening is a Coup D’etat…Many politicians have said so, the Military are incensed, the public are unaware of what is going on.

    Did you Know, This Country belongs to the People, NOT to Parliament, Our common rights predate Parliament
    currently, without our consent it is sold for the cost of a £40.00 Immigration pack.
    It is to be surrendered to a foreign Power, the EU.
    We have never been asked about this nor given our consent to this.
    This country is OUR Birthright, paid for with the Blood of Our Ancestors, It belongs to Our Chilren.
    Immigration is to dilute Our National Identity, (and our vote), welfare is the Lure.
    This must stop,
    We must demand control of our Country back for Our Children
    They are hoping we do not know this so educate yourself about our Constitution, yes we do have a constitution
    and it is written, it is just on several documents rather than one, again, THEY will tell you we do not have and we need to write ourselves a (EU ) Constitution, this is a Lie.
    Spread the word.Wake others Up they are stealing our Country, surrendering it to a foreign power is Treason.
    Your MP is hoping you do not Know this, DEMAND that he votes against this treasonous plot if he wants to keep his seat
    http://www.britsattheirbest.com/freedom/f_your_own_choice.htm
    http://www.brugesgroup.com
    http://www.betteroffout.co.uk/sup01.htm
    http://www.european-referendum.org.uk/101-reasons.html
    Headed for an EU Soviet type Police State.
    http://www.eutruth.org.uk
    http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2007/10/3/3269034.html
    http://thewestminsternews.co.uk
    http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
    http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/15991/How-the-Government-has-declared-war-on-white-English-people
    http://www.capc.co.uk
    http://thebestronpaulvideos.blogspot.com
    http://irrepressible.info/about
    http://bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/2007/10/frankfurt-subversion.html
    http://bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/2007/10/ludicrous-diversion.html

    Comment by British Patriot — 2 November 2007 @ 1.34 pm | Reply

  3. […] Trevor Philips, the head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (he of the ironically ‘pro-Muslim’ revisionist British history that overrides, indeed overwrites, the separate ‘native’ histories of England, […]

    Pingback by Sharia, English Law and British Values « Britology Watch: Deconstructing ‘British Values’ — 9 February 2008 @ 3.17 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: