I am reminded that this year will mark the 300th anniversary of the Act of Union that created Great Britain. There are those that would like it to also be the last, a subject I’ve written about extensively in the past. Indeed this desire seems to be spreading both North and South of the border:
devolution was supposed to defeat nationalism. That was what George Robertson, the former chief of Nato, famously said would happen: devolution would kill nationalism ’stone dead’. Not so. For England increasingly feels the intrinsic unfairness of devolution. Now John Reid, a Scottish Home Secretary, presides over a department that has limited powers in his own constituency of Airdrie and Shotts. Soon Gordon Brown will move into 10 Downing Street, to make laws on health and education that have no play in North Queensferry, where he lives. Meanwhile, a nation ashamed of the Iraq war tries to shake off culpability by turning to the SNP.
Me? Well, I still stand by the words I wrote in my very first post at teh old site, now to be found here:
Great Britain was founded in 1707, nearly three hundred years ago. The anniversary approaches. Are we doing anything about it? Let’s be proud to be British, and remember that we are also English, Welsh, Scottish or whatever. Let us look to the future and be proud of our heritage, not look to the past and try to bolt the doors.
I’d like to celebrate the foundation of this great nation. Look to the future, a liberal, tolerant, open minded society that truly does live and let live.
Given that this useless Government appears to be doing and planning absolutely nothing, anyone got any ideas?
January 11th, 2007
Posted by
MatGB |
Britain, patriotism, Liberal Britain, England, Devolution, History |
7 comments
How could I resist linking to this? Jonn Elledge:
conspicuous displays of British patriotism are most likely to come from boozed up sports fans and UKIP politicians. Perhaps this is the biggest challenge to liberal patriotism: our national icons have been hijacked by the right … None of those things of which Britons are supposed to be proud relate to my experience of this country. John Major’s warm beer on the village cricket green sounds suspiciously like a world that vanished decades before I got round to being born … I’m not saying that there isn’t much in Britain’s history to be ashamed of: Suez, Dresden, and the fact we unleashed both the concentration camp and Jim Davidson on an unsuspecting world, to name but four.
He goes on to list a few of the things that he is proud of. As a flag waving liberal socialist, I guess I ought to contribute a few ideas as well. How about…
June 16th, 2006
Posted by
MatGB |
liberalism, Britain, patriotism, Liberal Britain |
8 comments
Well, my post from last night has generated some comments here and elsewhere, and another post on United Irelander. Specifically, I’ve just had a comment from ‘an deoraíocht’ of The Northern Irish Magyar, and it’s both a good one and specifically disagreeing with a number of my points; I typed up a response, but it’s long enough to justify a follow up post. I’ve snipped some of what he said, as the full text of both would make this, well, too long; apologies if it’s a little dijointed to read…
February 9th, 2006
Posted by
MatGB |
Constitution, Britain, England, Ireland, Northern Ireland |
15 comments
Well, I wouldn’t go that far…
United Irelander: Top Ten Tuesday - The English:
7. Fairly objective towards Ireland’s north - The English seem fairly apathetic towards the North these days and when the North is brought up, they tend to approach things with an open mind. In fact, according to recent polls, the English actually favour a United Ireland at this point.
Not yet, anyway.
For those paying attention, yes, the logo at the top combines three flags. Two crosses and a Dragon. No St Patrick to be seen. And yes, that is deliberate. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I’m British, not UKish. While I instintively distrust the likes of McGuinness and Adams, I’m not that keen on Paisley and his ilk either, both sides were out of order throughout the conflict. British Govt regularly touts the ’self determination’ mantra. Anyone ask us? Keep 1707, that one made us Great. Get rid of 1800, we were never really United, were we?
Now is not the time, no idea when it will be, but I just don’t care about 6 counties and the protestanct ascendancy. Never have. Not just because I’m an atheist. Orange landed at Brixham, doesn’t mean I like the Orangemen much…
February 8th, 2006
Posted by
MatGB |
Constitution, Britain, England, Ireland, Northern Ireland |
18 comments
Look, it’s not often they do something good, so worth trumpeting it:
The “global gag” rule, as it has become known, was imposed by President George Bush in 2001. It requires any organisation applying for US funds to sign an undertaking not to counsel women on abortion - other than advising against it - or provide abortion services.
The UK will today become the founder donor of a fund set up specifically to attempt to replace the lost dollars and increase safe abortion services.
(via Owen and Gendergeeek).
February 7th, 2006
Posted by
MatGB |
NuLab, Britain, patriotism, abortion |
no comments
So Gordon Brown is calling for a something like a Britain Day.
OK, so I’ll stick my neck out and say that Gordon Brown has just had a good idea. Well, perhaps not the day itself, which will probably just devolve into ‘going down the pub’ day, but a good idea in that the fact that Brown is interested in talking about British identity and multiculturalism shows that at least he is concerned about the issue and might like to do something about it.
However, a Britain Day could be a good idea if we don’t let it devolve into something pointless.
January 14th, 2006
Posted by
PaulJ |
Brown, Britain, patriotism, Britain Day, Identity |
4 comments
Right, torture is always wrong. Right? Information received from it is always useless, right? Well, as DK points out, no. But it’s still wrong. A few people have put forward rational justifications for the use of torture, or at least the acceptance of the use of torture acquired from elsewhere, notably Owen and Brian Barder. Except that, well, even those of us who find the idea of torture utterly reprehensible will use this argument. From, um, Craig Murray:
I am familiar with your argument. If you had an al-Qaida operative in front of you, who had planted a bomb about to go off, would you hit him until he told you it was about to go off. Of course you would - I would, anyway.
Recently, on BBC Radio 4’s The Moral Maze, a representative of Amnesty was asked what he would do if he had a known bomber locked up and a known bomb planted. He (unfortunately) ducked the question directly, and simply asserted that the intelligence officer who conducted the ‘interrogation’ should still be charged afterwards, and the extenuating circumstances be taken into account.
That is, and remains, my position. Torture is wrong, and has to be illegal. But sometimes, if you have the proverbial bomb scenario, you break the rules, and get the job done, by whatever means are necessary. After the fact, investigations are made and charges are put.
- Crime: torture known terrorist.
- Extenuating circumstances: saved major city from nuclear (or whatever) attack.
Pretty sure I know what the judge is going to do with that one. But 100% certain I want the judge to make that decision. Back to Craig:
But real life isn’t that clear cut. What we are talking about is completely different. In Uzbekistan thousands of people are tortured every year, and at least 99% of them are nothing to do with terrorism, as in completely innocent. And a fair number of those die under torture. Most of them are just religous Muslims.
There’s a difference between extracting information from a known terrorist operative that you know can save lives, and using torture as a method of state control and repression.
Life isn’t black and white. It’s not “with us or against us”. Some things are clearly wrong, but sometimes, well, you do what you must, and you face up to the consequences. Back to Craig, this time in a comment on Brian’s blog linked above (emphasis mine):
in Uzbekistan the horror hits you in the face. The very nice old lady whose front gate was opposite mine, a member of a banned democratic opposition party, was attacked in the lane by the Uzbek intelligence services, not twenty metres from the Residence gate. They broke her legs, poured paint down her throat, and run her over in an army truck. She was my friend. (Fortunately she survived).
When I had dinner with the distinguished dissident Professor Mirsaidov in Samarkand, that same night his grandson was abducted and killed after many hours of appalling torture. The body was dumped outside the family home after I left. The Russian Ambassador told me, from his excellent sources, that this was intended as a warning to both dissidents and me not to meet each other.
My horror at all this and at the extent of US involvement strained my relationship with the office, and they asked me to resign
If we’re supposed to be the ‘good guys’. If the current justification for the removal of Saddam was that he was an evil nasty tyrant who tortured his citizens. Why were we knowingly supporting a regime that was, from what I can tell, just as bad?
Murray, again:
If the government had argued “Yes, we did accept a lot of information from the Uzbeks, knowing it might very probably come from torture, but we have to protect the UK”, (which I think is a fair summary of the line you argue above) I would not have released these documents. But the government has not been saying that. They have trotted out such obfuscations and circumlocutions, even in the face of direct parliamentary inquiry, that I think it now amounts to lying.
One last word. Some blogs and commenters have stated that Murray is nothing but a self-publicist, that he only seeks to sell his book. OK. That may, in fact, be true. But his book is telling the story of his experiences with an oppressive, nasty regime, and our govts complicity in keeping that regime in power. Even if he is only out for himself (which is not my reading), I don’t care. I want that story to be told.
This isn’t about torture as always wrong. This is about torture as an instrumentof state repression, and our Govts support of that repression.
January 2nd, 2006
Posted by
MatGB |
Britain, torture, craig murray |
4 comments
Was planning to do a post on mis uses of the term ‘multiculturalism’ (by both sides), but Robert Sharp has done a pretty good one already:
Communities living side-by-side, not integrating, becoming ghettos, that in turn become no-go areas for the police and ordinary citizens. Cultures and ethnicities living side-by-side without integration or communication is not what I would call multiculturalism… just antagonism. Multiculturalism has to imply a certain degree of integration, assimilation, and above all, a process of change for it to be something to value.
To me, multiculturalism is the ability to have a friend who’s muslim, another who’s jewish and to chase after a girl whose grandmother came from Africa. We learn from those who move here, just as they learn from us, we take on board the bits we like, condemn the bits we dislike (forced marriages anyone?) and the new communities do the same with us. Eventually, they merge together, so differences in religion mean as little to us as the differences in denomination now do mostly everywhere (except Northen Ireland of course).
This vegetarian isn’t likely to be buying a kebad any time soon, but my local Thai place does a damn fine tofu based thing I can’t pronounce. I like that. Still can’t figure out how to cook the stuff though…
December 27th, 2005
Posted by
MatGB |
Liberal Britain, multiculturalism |
6 comments
I had one of those rare moments yesterday. I was sat in a friends shop chatting and listening to the radio news. A familiar voice came on, and I found myself agreeing with every word. Then I realised it was Blair. The great shame of the UK electoral system is it denies the UKIP tendency seats at Westminster, letting Blair off the hook when it comes to genuinely putting the case within Parliament. The Tories aren’t in favour of withdrawal, even with Cameron, and none of the other parties really challenge him. Hearing him ripping into Farage was brilliant. It’s just such a damn shame that Blair gave up on Europe so early in his term (you know, back when he was popular and some of us believed in him?).
December 22nd, 2005
Posted by
MatGB |
Blair, Britain, europe, EU |
6 comments
I am reminded by my friend Mark, from Alderney, that today is the anniversary of his bit of the worlds invasion of our bit of the world, the Battle of Hastings. This brings to mind a little phrase that always seems to crop up when matter European are discussed, that wonderful old phrase about a thousand years of history. An example, from UKIP, here:
…the Prime Minister is signing away nothing less than Britain’s right to self-government. A thousand years of history goes down the drain…
The historian in me is always bothered by this terminology. What thousand years are you referring to, exactly?
October 14th, 2005
Posted by
MatGB |
Britain, europe, England, History |
4 comments
