|
Has the Twentieth Century Seen the Unmaking of the British Nation?
Throughout the Nineteenth, and early Twentieth centuries, British national identity, was assured and confident. At its height, the British Empire and Commonwealth encompassed a quarter of the human race, and nearly a fifth of the world’s land surface. However, as Marr notes, at the end of the Twentieth century, ‘we are spinning with change, drunk on change, maddened by it.’ The last century has altered our world position, our laws and constitution, our coinage, our racial mix, food and religion, sexual mores, the agreed territory of the nation, and our culture in a phenomenon noted by Marr as “Rollback”. ... ’ Indeed, Marr points out that ‘fear and fascination with the EU has transfixed those British leaders whose predecessors’ roars –their very throat clearings- were heard with concern and respect throughout the world.’ The suggestion seems to be that British national identity was most assured at the height of her empire. ... ’ Here one must note Anderson’s thesis, that a nation is ‘an imagined political community –and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign’ , as Enoch Powell put it, the ‘life of nations…is lived largely in the imagination.’ Yet, we must also note the distinction between Britain as a physical political entity created by the Act of Union in 1707: the British State, and the various ‘imagined communities’, invented narratives that have served to bind her disparate inhabitants since its conception. ... This failure continued throughout the rest of the century, contributing towards the current crisis of national identity. In this sense, the twentieth century has seen the unmaking of the British nation. Therefore, although it had not yet been problematised, British national identity was most self assured during the time of empire, as at this time, Britain was fulfilling exactly that, which it was constructed for: empire. ... ’ Judd observes how the Commonwealth has been ‘reduced to, at best, a fitfully relevant international organisation, and at worst, to a barely understood geographical expression. ...
The uncertainty currently enveloping the British nation manifests itself in a number of different ways. ... For example, the Felixstowe community that has revived the ancient Anglo-Saxon Church, or the Norfolk man busy practicing pre-Norman cultural traditions. For some, the answer has been to hide behind walls and sophisticated security systems. This is seen at an upmarket housing development visited in Essex, where people ‘use the money they have to keep out the real world’, where the ‘sentimentality for the village green can only survive under lock and key.’ There has also been a retreat into nationalism. ... Suggesting that British history was traditionally bound up in empire, he attributes its passing to the current situation. He notes how ‘the present condition of “Europe” has produced a crisis of historiography’ . Even the government has been affected by this unease, as revealed by its furious attempts to “re-brand” Britain as cosmopolitan, forward-thinking, “Cool Britannia”. ... Throughout the twentieth century, certain writers have espoused Disrelian notions of a nation as an organic community. ... ’ However, Seton-Watson asserts: ‘I am driven to the conclusion that no “scientific definition” of the nation can be devised’ Indeed, Anderson notes that ‘all communities larger that primordial villages of face-to-face contact (and perhaps even these) are imagined. ... Official nationalism, a later innovation, was then used by ruling dynasties in order to legitimise themselves, thereby “re-branding” an empire: a nation. ...
One need only look to the history of the British Isles in order to see her multi-ethnic make-up. ... ’ Indeed, even the currant Royal Family, a pivotal focus of the British imagined community, is German. ... ’ Huge numbers of West Indians, Africans, and other Asians from the commonwealth have also settled here during the twentieth century, further changing the ethnic make-up of the nation. ...
A belief in common racial and cultural traits held by the British is further undermined by examining the process by which the nation came together. ... The fact that the eighteenth century saw the first tentative steps along the road to empire. ... ’ Indeed, the empire gave great cohesive strength to this artificially constructed state throughout the eighteenth, nineteenth, and early twentieth centuries. Colley believes that ‘Britishness was never just imposed from the centre’, and that ‘the extent of Anglicisation has…often been exaggerated.’ She urges: ‘we need to stop thinking of Britishness as a result of an integration and homogenisation of disparate cultures’, and asserts: ‘what most enabled Great Britain to emerge as an artificial nation…was a series of massive wars between 1689 and 1815 that allowed its diverse inhabitants to focus on what they had in common, rather than on what divided them, and that forged a overseas empire from which all parts of Britain could secure real as well as psychic profits. ... ’ During the twentieth century, the British State has been further bound by the growth of the British administrative state. ...
A series of inherent weaknesses resulting from the creation of the British State suggest that it would be impossible for it to continue indefinitely. ... Her legal and education systems never came fully under the control of the British state. Similarly, the British were never able to gain full control of Ireland, as seen by the fact that it remained almost exclusively catholic, and continues to do so today. ... As a result of this anomaly, if the constructed, imagined community, that bound Britain was to weaken, the Scots, Welsh, and Irish may question their commitment to the British State (as has been seen recently). ... Although she was involved almost continually in war and the construction of empire between, the late seventeenth and early twentieth century, both were at an end by the mid-twentieth century. ... ’ As Marquand comments, ‘the absolute sovereignty of the King-in-Parliament, which that technique presupposes, has set narrow limits on the expansion.’ There is, therefore, a ‘deep incompatibility between the doctrine that lies at the very heart of British statehood –the doctrine of the absolute and inalienable sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament- and any form of power-sharing.’ As a result of this constitutional feature, it would not be possible for any region seeking autonomy to do so within a federal United Kingdom, rather, only through complete secession leading to the break-up of the British State. Though this assessment could be accused of being overly teleological, there is little to suggest that at the time of Union, the British State was considered indefinite, thereby creating a need to resolve these anomalies.
Perhaps because of these anomalies within the British State, an imagined community has been created in order to bind the disparate peoples of the British nation. In this way, the empire that bound the British state was able to pervade its inhabitants. ... Education has played an integral part. ... ’ Hill emphasises how influential the teaching of history has been in the creation of the British imagined community. ... Nick Tate, called for ‘the development of British cultural identity in all schoolchildren.’
The rise of the mass consumer society during the twentieth century, has also contributed to the creation of the British national community. Despite commenting on the difficulty of ascertaining information on the subject, Benson asserts that ‘there cannot be any doubt that in certain respects at least the British experience of consumption did encourage a consciousness of, and quite often a pride in, British national identity.
Approximate Word count = 6006
Approximate Pages = 24
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
