My Country. Right or Wrong? Bernard Porter Argues That History and Patriotism Should Be Kept Firmly Apart

By Porter, Bernard | History Today, July 2006 | Go to article overview

My Country. Right or Wrong? Bernard Porter Argues That History and Patriotism Should Be Kept Firmly Apart


Porter, Bernard, History Today


IT SEEMS TO BE GENERALLY AGREED (a) that we lack a sense of 'national identity' for Britain and for England (less so for Scotland, Wales and even Northern Ireland); (b) that this is a Bad Thing, especially when we want to make it plain to immigrants what being 'British' means; and (c) that the best way to find that out for ourselves is to rummage in our national past. It is our history that can show us what our 'core' values have been through the ages; what has made Britain distinctive and (by implication) good; and consequently what we can all be proud of--so binding us all together (including immigrants). It works with other countries, in particular the United States, whose patriotism is very firmly rooted in its history--or, rather, in a mythic version of it. That's what gives the US much of its strength and confidence. Britain has nothing like this.

Granting for the sake of argument (only) that it can be useful for a people to have a firm sense of its 'national identity', looking for this in Britain's case is fraught with problems. One is that people are bound to differ over what her 'core' traditional values are. This is because we've never been taught them in the past. One reason for that is a strong tradition in British education of not using history to teach 'patriotism' explicitly, unlike in many other countries of the world. (Mrs Thatcher tried to change that, but failed.) Of course, most history texts in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were broadly pro-British, but in a variety of ways. Some lauded British military and imperial achievements; far more, however, focused on the growth of domestic 'liberty'; and a number were overtly critical, especially of Britain's exploits abroad. Very few indeed made much of Britain's difference from other nations; most emphasized the common humanity of the British with the other peoples of the world. So children were brought up with little sense of this particular form of 'identity'.

This, in fact--to be paradoxical for a moment--may be Britain's most 'identifying' feature: that she never had any identifying features apart from it. At least, no one could ever agree on them. When past Britons thought of 'Britishness'--if they thought of it at all--they did so in entirely different and even conflicting ways, according to their class, their nationality within the British Isles, religion, gender, and so on. The nineteenth and twentieth-century upper classes' view of what made an 'Englishman', for example, was totally distinct from that of the working classes. We can see a late echo of this in John Major's famous 1993 'back to basics' image of England as a country of village greens, district nurses on bicycles and warm beer, which of course bore no resemblance at all to urban workers' views of it. 'Britishness' and 'Englishness' also changed over the years. It is interesting to look at some of the 'values' that puffed Britons up in the nineteenth century: not all of these have stood the test of time. Early on, for example, one of the things that made them most proud was that they didn't have a police force, like on the Continent. Later, any kind of 'secret service' was associated with Continental tyranny. In the mid-nineteenth century they took pride in being a peculiarly pacifist country--against much of the evidence, it has to be said. Later on, most Britons took huge pride in their absolute tolerance of all immigrants and refugees, even the fieriest ones, like Karl Marx and some later terrorists, whom they resolutely refused to exclude or even extradite. Again, this was what made Britain superior to other countries. Much of the 'patriotism' of the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was intensely radical and divisive, defining itself in terms of violent working- and middle-class struggle against the nation's rulers. (Hence Dr Johnson's famous dismissal of it: 'the last refuge of a scoundrel'. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

My Country. Right or Wrong? Bernard Porter Argues That History and Patriotism Should Be Kept Firmly Apart
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.