Views from the English Community

Introduction

The England Society - Keele University
Richard Chambers

Modern Education & Political Correctness
Ken Howman

Missionary Work
Tony Linsell

Introduction
The main thread in this book is a very brief sketch of the history of the English people. The greatest emphasis is on the origins of England and the English. The reason for this approach is that every nation needs a clear sense of who they are, where they are from, and where they belong. Yet the early period is the one about which the English people are most confused, which is not surprising given the deliberate policy of those who govern us to strip us English of our communal identity and the communal loyalties that spring from it. Instead they want us to identify with, and be loyal to, the British state and the ideology it promotes. A fine example of the propaganda employed was to be seen on Channel 4, 20th September 2004. It was the final part of Britain AD. This programme serves as a comic example of how multiculturalists go about attacking and undermining English national identity. The strategy is simple; they seek to show that the English do not exist. What Anglo-Saxon migration? Englishness is merely an invented identity – a fashion statement – something concocted by Bede. We are not English at all, but British. And to lend support to this they wheeled on Robin Cook, MP, who conjured a form of words that lent support to the idea that English national identity is without historical substance and that we are British, members of a longstanding and vibrant multicultural society. Why ask Robin Cook for his opinion – what authority can he bring to the argument? The short answer is none. He is a Scotsman who is rightly proud of his Scottish identity and did what he could to bring about the creation of the Scottish Parliament. As for Francis Pryor who wrote the book and presented the programme, I can only hope that he comes to see that Britain AD had more to do with politics than history, and that a serious history programme would not end with an advertisement for multiculturalism. In an article in BBC History September 2004, he is reported as saying, “I must confess that I am not an Anglo-Saxonist, nor even a specialist in early medieval history…” Those words should have been written on his forehead so that those watching the programme could have given such credence to his theories as they deserved.
Fortunately, the instinct for national identity is deep and enduring, so despite our communal enemies having complete control of the institutions of the state, which includes education (at all levels), the English continue to assert their identity. We should give thanks for historians like Simon Schama and David Starkey.
I feel gloomy about what is happening to our country and people but I am very optimistic about the way an English resistance is in the making. Capable people are coming forward with the skills, energy, and determination that are essential to a successful campaign for the revival of English fortunes. Other ethnic groups have a very long start on us in promoting their culture, interests, and needs but they will soon find us alongside them demanding recognition and asserting our rights.
The principal aim of this book is to set the record straight – to establish our roots and mark out our territory. It is, if you like, a brick through the glass house of those who would prefer that we English meekly melt away. The people propagating anti-English propaganda will eventually come to see that we English are not going to tolerate their insults any more than other ethnic groups would. Perhaps these historical revisionists should make programmes which argue that the Atlantic slave trade or the Jewish holocaust never happened. Ideally the writers and presenters should not be expert on the subjects. Let them see what would result from such insults.

The England Society – Keele University
Richard Chambers
Monday 6th October 2003. Seven days ago the England Society had officially launched as a Student Union society at Keele University in North Staffordshire. We were one society among many others, which covered a wide range of interests from music to martial arts, and the obligatory saving the planet and stopping those stood accused of ruining it. But for the first time ever, England was being represented by a brand new student society, a project that I felt needed to be started. Now I was sitting in the office of the Student Union president to explain myself.
I never expected an easy ride. I never wanted one either. And I didn’t get one. My first objective had been achieved within the first week! The story of the beginnings of the England Society does document a struggle. But like many Englishmen before me, I saw a challenge and set forth to find a solution.
On the morning of the 28th of September 2003, I was sitting on our society stand at the Fresher’s Fair watching the people come and go. I was not sure what kind of a reaction to expect from passers by. The Student Union is traditionally the domain of the socialist burn all flags type. Despite the peripheral positioning of the stand, which displayed the England Society title over a giant cross of St George, I stuck out like a sore thumb. Groups started to loiter at what could have been considered the outer marker on the approach to the stand. Not giving a wide berth and shaking heads in despair, but looking with interest with intrigued grins on their faces as if they were daring someone from the group to actually approach and ask what this is all about. And slowly but surely they did.
Concerns over being chased out of the building with torches and pitchforks dispelled, I was brought onto my second area of apprehension... How people would react to the literature. Our one and only leaflet at the time was a simple affair consisting of a welcome and thanks for interest before going on to give the basics about fair and moderate representation, a list of planned and provisional events over the first few months and a short piece on the current political struggles faced by England and the English, kindly provided by Julien Crighton from wearetheenglish.com.
After just over an hour had passed, I had to rush away to the Union’s print shop to make more copies of the leaflet, such was the amount that had been taken. Some people took the leaflets and moved on. Others stopped to ask a few brief questions. Most encouragingly of all were the more than a few people who took the line “An England Society? About time too!”. The vast amounts of positive interest came from people of many nationalities and races, all could see this was not to be an exclusive project, but something a lot of people could be involved in. The sore thumb of the event was becoming quite a point of interest, with people visibly and genuinely interested in this audacious little stand in the wings. Whether an England Society in England should or should not have been considered audacious is a different matter. The fact is that it was.

However, shortly before the clock struck midday, a young woman with a badge and a clipboard arrived. Despite the interest being experienced on and around the stand, a great deal of discomfort was being caused by our presence to someone upstairs. Someone involved in the running of the Student Union wanted the sore thumb amputated. The girl with the clipboard was the elected executive for communications at the Union. An attractive Northern Irish girl, she sat down and explained that a complaint had been made with regards to the content of our literature. More specifically, that someone had taken a dislike to one of our provisional events, which was to be a debate on multiculturalism. We were able to explain our different positions on the matter and, after about ten minutes in conversation, I was allowed to go about my business and she went away to continue hers.
But only another ten minutes had passed before a different girl with a different clipboard, who had drunk either too much or too little coffee that morning, marched up to the stand flanked by Union security. This girl failed to introduce herself (although I later found out she was another executive) and went straight into telling us that it had been decided that the England Society was operating in violation of Student Union policy and we had to pack up and leave immediately. This did our image no good at all.
And so there I was, sitting in the President’s office seven days later explaining why I thought that I and my society should have the same rights to political expression and debate as was afforded other groups and individuals that operate within the Union. We were allowed to continue as a society, but the battle between the England Society and the policies of our own Student Union continued throughout the year.
The society operated successfully. We debated and supported many of the arguments expressed elsewhere in this book. But my purpose is not to put forward arguments but to record my experiences. And an experience it has been. When I conceived this project I knew it was something that I had to make a reality. I felt passionate about it and wanted it to disturb the uniform certainties of student politics. I also knew that such a project, in the current climate and possibly more so in the setting of a university, would not be met with universal approval, despite the aims being sensible and reasonable. I knew that we would have to be audacious.
The England argument is a relatively new one, and many people weren’t sure what to expect from the England Society at its launch. Our removal from the event caused many more to wonder about our aims, which is understandable because there has been a widespread failure to properly distinguish between English and British nationalism, or indeed to know anything at all about nationalism and nationalists. The common presumption seems to be that nationalists are necessarily conservative/rightwing. This view conflicts with what is known of nationalist movements throughout the world or even within the British Isles. The Cross of St George has also come to be seen as a label for hatred. We must continue to inform people that this should not be so. It is the flag of England and anyone who wishes to display it should be free to do so without feeling shame. We cannot be blamed for the views and actions of those who bring it into disrepute.

Those of us who assert our English identity are seen by Unionists as a threat, not because we are extremists but because all Unionists (the three main political parties plus UKIP and the BNP) see the assertion of English national identity as a much more serious threat to the Union than that of Welsh or Scottish nationalism. Unionists have an interest in promoting a British identity and, to varying degrees, denigrating those who promote a competing English national identity.
We face a daunting challenge. But it is the English who saw unspannable gorges and spanned them. We must preserve our English way-of-life, which has at its core the belief that we should be fair and honest with each other so that all may enjoy freedom. We should not trade our freedom and autonomy for membership of Continental unions and a contrived stability. Since when have the English turned from a challenge and bought stability at the cost of freedom?
Rarely have the English been so politically quiet and docile as during the past few years. However, an English awakening is taking place. Students at this university now talk of an English Parliament versus Prescott’s Regions in politics tutorials. Our existence outside the European Union is being seen as an ever more credible prospect by many. The political correctness lobby are finding it ever more difficult to convince the people of England that their re-engineering of society is what we wanted all along. People are learning that multi-culturalism and multi-racialism are not the same thing and that neither necessitates the other.
In view of what I have seen at this university, I can proudly say that the English are awakening.

When returning to the Potteries house in which I once lived, I occasionally got off the bus early and walked the last half-mile. I did this so that I could enjoy the fantastic views offered from the top of my road in Wolstanton. There I could see across the Potteries, over Longport and Etruria, towards Burslem and Hanley on the far side of the vale. The old potteries factories hugged the Trent and Mersey Canal, which long ago linked one of the birthplaces of the modern industrial age to the rest of an envious world. This cradle is still watched over on all sides by a thousand castles to a thousand Englishmen. Either bathed in the sun or under a blanket of streetlights, this real-life portrait of over a hundred years of history inspired me like nothing else. It made me see that England and the English had to be recognised and awakened, and that I should do what I could to play a part in the struggle.
In conceiving this project, I read widely about the problems facing England and the English. I am in no doubt that we are being pushed off the political carriageway. Fortunately, the English can, like no-one else, read a story of despair and turn it into a struggle for the victory of hope over despondency. From the moment I chose to act in a positive way rather than sit back and do nothing, I was being English and proud. And we do have so much of which we can be proud. I use the word proud to mean assured, pleased, and confident, not arrogant and haughty.

If to always struggle and hope in the face of daunting difficulties is the way of the English, then the English will never fade. Enjoy struggling to be English! Laugh, and try to make others laugh. The more we and other people enjoy what we do, the stronger we become. Parody of others and ourselves can sometimes be the best way to make a point and the English are renowned for being the best at it.
I know the struggle continues and I’m thoroughly looking forward to playing my part in it.

Modern Education and Political Correctness
Ken Howman
Nazi is not a word to be taken lightly by anyone with knowledge of 20th century history. Yet it was a word used to describe and, more accurately, insult me. It was used by many students in my particular high school/sixth form college as a means to try to make me feel ashamed of my beliefs and views - to make me feel different, wrong, defective. Why? Because I assert my English identity and express a desire to preserve the English way-of-life. In other words, I am an English nationalist.

I was astounded by the violent reaction when I expressed an opinion in a Sociology class three years ago. My teacher delivered a speech on the subject of nationalism. I won’t refer to it as an argument because only one point of view was put forward. “Nationalism is like patriotism gone wrong”, she said. I was stunned. Not just by the sheer ignorance of such a claim but more so by the complete absence of any critical response from any of my fellow students. I foolishly raised my hand to suggest a different view - to explain that it is natural for people to celebrate their national identity. I said that as I am English, live in England, and value English culture. I consider myself to be an English nationalist. Both teacher and class immediately set me upon, all unshakeable in their belief that I was wrong. I was shouted down, with no chance for a sympathetic hearing.

Not long after these events, during another discussion in class on the subject of crime and deviance, I was given the title, “Nazi”. My crime once again was to express non-PC views – to be unorthodox. I was told that I was immature and inhumane. I had thought that a willingness to listen to the views of others was an integral part of being mature, and to shout at those with whom one disagrees and to call them a Nazi is not only immature but also a sign of an inability to discuss or think about ideas that conflict with the dominant ideology. Is that not a sign of totalitarianism?

Such is the power of state institutions - especially schools and colleges - to promote the approved state ideology that many people fail to recognise it for the propaganda it is. This ideology, which for convenience can be called Political Correctness, promotes intolerance of contrary views. It is a form of totalitarianism that is nearer to Communism than Nazism, in that it preaches that ‘everybody must be treated equally’ whether or not, by any commonsense consideration, they deserve to be.

Human rights is a phrase that trips off the tongue of the politically correct yet they fail to recognise the right to an ideologically-free education as one of these rights. An obsession with dogma takes precedent over everything else, including discipline. Many teachers have virtually no authority over their pupils because they aren’t allowed to administer effective punishments. Children need show no respect for teachers yet feel free to demand it for themselves. I have witnessed such behaviour.

Those students who do pay attention are able to follow a thoroughly biased curriculum geared to indoctrination. The ignorance that results is appalling; this is especially so in history. Many pupils don’t know who Admiral Lord Nelson was, and they lack even basic knowledge of important English and British historical events. What's more, they don't seem to care. In fact, most history lessons seem tailored to promote this attitude. For example, when the subject of the British Empire came up, a negative atmosphere descended on the room. No one knew a thing about Drake or Nelson but much time was given to a long list of ‘crimes against humanity’ perpetrated by the British Empire. The GCSE history course included topics such as The Black Slave Trade and The History of Native American Indians! Both were interesting but what about my native English history?
Sociology and history are subjects where PC ideology might be expected but it affects (or infects) virtually every subject and every classroom, although some subjects are more prone to corruption than others, particularly the essay based ones, like English, in which ‘suitable reading materials’ can be easily decided upon by the Politically Correct education establishment. My current book in English, The Handmaid's Tale, is a feminist perspective novel which is thought provoking and very well written, but it is a political book of the type liked by PC ideologues. Its satirisation of religion is aimed principally at Christianity. No approved book, however thought provoking and well written, would be tolerated if it satirised Islam or any other religion except Christianity; to do so would be considered racist and an infringement of human rights. Insulting Christianity raises no such concerns.
In many countries, national flags are commonly seen in the classroom but not in England. There are no emblems or images of any kind to suggest that the school is in England. There is, however, no shortage of PC imagery and texts. In fact they are to be found on every available surface. Perhaps you can appreciate the terribly depressing atmosphere that one such as myself has to endure each day. The sense of isolation that I frequently feel is not something I should have to endure in my own country.
It seems to me that the education system is designed to function as a sieve that removes all traces of England and Englishness from the curriculum. Thus my homeland, my culture, and my identity are deemed not to exist. In this way, naturally rebellious youths become sheep. They are immersed in PC ideology until they bleat in the approved way.
But some survive. I am a free man – I am an English nationalist!

Missionary Work
Tony Linsell
I never cease to be amazed at how ignorant most English people are of their communal origins and history. It is strange that this should be so in an age when the British state encourages the members of every other ethnic group to embrace and celebrate their culture and identity. It is perhaps due to the lack of a perceived strong and clear national English identity that many English people search their family tree hoping to find someone with a positive identity of which they can be proud. An Irish grandfather or great-grandfather fits the bill nicely but it really doesn’t matter what nationality they are, as long as it isn’t English. Then, with the encouragement of those who detest any positive expression of Englishness, they can claim – no boast – that they are ¼ or half Irish, which is of course infinitely preferable to being ¾ or half English. This sort of thing doesn't just happen in England. In Australia there are the noisy Irish-Australians who jump at every opportunity to insult English-Australians, i.e. the vast majority. Such is the propaganda that few Anglos are willing to admit to being English-Australians and instead try to find an Irish or other ancestor. The result is a very large number of English-Australians, with English names, indulging in Pom-bashing.

One of the extraordinary things about those who take such pride in being 25% Italian, or whatever, is that in other circumstances they are often the first to deny that national identity has anything to do with ancestry. Instead they promote the notion that anyone born in England is English, or more extraordinary still, that anyone living in England is English. So, on the one hand you can claim to be Irish if you have an Irish grandparent (and officially represent Ireland in a sport), which means that Irishness is deemed to be in the blood. On the other hand, if you claim that Englishness is determined by ancestry (i.e. that the English are, like the Irish, an ethnic group) then you risk condemnation for not being inclusive – a mortal sin. It only requires a little thought and the application of common sense to see that membership of a nation/ethnic group, and the sense of community and belonging that comes from it, depends on very much more than where you happen to live or are born. If I had been born while my mother was travelling in Japan I would not be Japanese, and if I went to live in Scotland I would not become Scottish.
Due in large part to the deliberate and relentless promotion of alternative identities and loyalties, we are witnessing the decline of what was once a confident and positive English nation. Much missionary work is needed to turn things around, and it will not come from the British state or its governing elite, which see Englishness as a problem – a competing identity. It is for each of us to be a missionary and do what we can to show our fellow English that they do not have to apologise for being English or for defending their birthright. We also have to provide, as best we can, the cultural information that helps shape our sense of who we are and where we belong. Much of that information is to be found in the contributions to this book.

£14.95
44 articles, stories and poems from 18 contributors
ISBN 1-903313-03-1 248pages