An English Nationalism
Tony Linsell

This is a handbook of modern English nationalism. The focus is on English nationalism but it looks at wider issues that affect all nations. It sets out a worldview that deals with the issue of globalism and the uniformity it promotes. The nationalism advanced here is a defensive nationalism concerned with protecting national communities and promoting communal democracy. The ideal world is one of independent nation-states; a place where nations organise their political and economic systems as they choose; a place where each nation is able to live by its own ways in freedom. This ideal is contrasted with the reality of an aggressive globalism that destroys communities and diversity in its constant striving for ever more centralisation and uniformity. The English battle for recognition as a nation in its homeland is part of that wider struggle. The theme of this book is that a nation is a group of people who share a communal identity, culture, language, ancestry, and history. If a nation is to survive it must maintain its communal boundaries and constantly regenerate itself.

Part 1- The origins of the English and the creation of England. An outline of early English history, beliefs and way of life.

Part 2 - A World View - includes: nationalism, states, nations, nationality & citizenship, civic-society, sovereignty, globalism, elites, realpolitik, ethnicity, race, elites.

Part 3 - Community & Survival - includes: evolution and natural selection, community, society, chaos & order; instinct v ideology, democracy, an English Parliament.

Part 4 - The Great Upheaval - Liberals and multi-culturalism, immigration, looking to the future.

£16.90 - 432 pages - paperback - 245 x 170mm 7" x 10" - ISBN 1-903313-01-5

Foreword
We live in an age when many English people, and in particular the young, know next to nothing about their history, and are uncertain about their national identity. One of the reasons for this sad state of affairs is that for many years the English have been encouraged to think of themselves as being primarily British and, more recently, as Europeans or even as citizens of the world; a term that reveals the confused thinking of those who use it. In schools, English history has been replaced with British and World history, and any promotion of an English national identity is treated as subversive of an inclusive state ideology. Those righteous individuals who promote the official creed are so convinced of the universal application, and everlasting nature of their ideology that they feel no need to defend it with rational argument. Instead, unbelievers who openly question the assumptions that underlie the modern liberal world-view are treated either as evil heretics or as fools.

A simple illustration of the propaganda used to promote a correct view of the world is to be found in the experience I had early in the 1990's when I visited a school and saw a large poster which proclaimed, We British are a rich mixture. It listed in a random manner many national and other groups including: Bangladeshi, Jamaican, Welsh, Nigerian, Somali, Turkish, Scots, Indian, Cypriot, Irish. When I asked a teacher why there was no mention of the English, I received a blank look and a shrug of the shoulders. His surprise at being asked such a question changed to suspicion, and it became obvious that I was seen as a troublemaker. No answer was given and I left the school puzzled as to whether the teacher really believed that there is no English nation or he simply preferred its existence to be downplayed or denied. Perhaps he was confused about the difference between being English and being British or maybe he found the notion of an English nation distasteful or ideologically inconvenient. Whatever the reason, it made me wonder what justification there could be for displaying that poster in a school. The motives of those who produce such propaganda are clearly ideological but to question their right to introduce it into schools, or to suggest that Englishness and English history be presented in a positive way, is to invite facile insults. A more hostile response can be expected to the suggestion that there is more to being English than being born in England or living there.

The school poster has given rise to this book, which has been written on and off, mostly off, from 1993 until 2000. The delay means that many of the events referred to in the text were happening at the time of writing but are now history. The great speed with which attitudes have changed over recent years became apparent during the process of revising and updating the text for publication. For instance, when I started I found it difficult to understand why English football supporters waved Union flags and sang the UK state anthem. Since then, the Euro 96 football championship and the creation of a Scottish Parliament has helped to change perceptions. The Union flag and the Britishness it represents has suddenly become a relic of the past. Perhaps by the time Euro 2008 arrives, the English will have a national anthem and England will be nearer to regaining a Parliament of its own - but I doubt it.

My thanks go to those who encouraged me to say what needs to be said, and to the many people who in various ways give their time and energy to awakening the English from their communal slumber.

Nationality and Citizenship

Nationality
Nationality is the condition, or fact, of belonging to a body of people sharing a common descent, culture, history and language. Nationality as used here does not mean citizenship - it means membership of a nationa - a community.

Nationality is normally acquired at birth; individuals are normally born into a community. It is the perception of a common ancestry and shared communal experiences that binds a nation together. At the heart of nationality is a feeling of belonging and oneness that marks out a communal boundary. The 'we' sentiment is not, as many wish us to believe, evil and deserving of eradication. On the contrary, it is at the heart of any community anywhere in the world, and gives rise to positive communal thoughts and deeds. It is difficult to frame exact rules for determining who is a member of a given nation but a useful guide, which can be used for any nation, is as follows: I am English if I believe that I am English and if I am accepted as being English by the members of that group of people who are commonly recognised as being English. It is a two-way instinctive relationship between individual and community. I could, for example, assert that I am Japanese but if I have physical and cultural characteristics that are not Japanese, as determined by the Japanese, I will not be accepted as part of the Japanese community. No amount of law-making, sulking or haranguing will alter that.

The two-way process of selection for inclusion or exclusion helps provide an answer to the question often thrown at nationalists, "What does it mean [for example] to be English?" The aim of the questioner is to draw out a list of characteristics that identify the English. Those asked are usually stumped for an answer, which is not surprising because the process of inclusion and exclusion is not a conscious one and does not work in the way implied by the question. The English, like all other nations, first see characteristics that exclude people because that is a more efficient way of working when analysing vast amounts of information. Most of the Earth's population can be quickly excluded from membership of any given nation on the basis of appearance and language. If necessary, other tests of varying degrees of sophistication can be used until we are satisfied that the person is either an insider or an outsider. If the person is accepted as an insider, the instinctive assessment process goes on and makes other judgements about the person, including such things as their social class. At this insider level of assessment, the filtering process can make finer distinctions because we have far more experience of dealing with insiders and can make better use of small amounts of information. For example, if a Russian gives me his home address it will tell me little, if anything, about him because my knowledge of Russia and things Russian is poor. An address in my hometown will tell me far more about the person who lives there.

Nationality is a total experience that starts in the family, which is the smallest community. Children are born into both a family and the wider communities of which that family is part. They are immersed in and soak up like a sponge the language, culture and history of the communities to which they belong. That experience helps mould children and gives them an identity and sense of belonging. They pick up habits of behaviour and thought that are part of what is meant by national character. That character-building process, if that is what it can properly be called, works best when there is cultural immersion and socialisation from a very early age. Once a national identity has been absorbed, it is embedded for life. It shapes values and perceptions in a way that makes it impossible for a member of one nation to completely shake off that identity and take on another. Learning another nation's customs, history and language is not enough because the new information is laid on old foundations.

The link between kinship, identity and loyalty can be illustrated as follows. An adopted child reared from a baby by loving adopted parents is likely to feel love and affection for those parents. When the child learns of its adoption it will normally want to seek out its biological parents. If they are found, the child is likely to feel an attachment to them that is different from that felt for the adopted parents, who it will probably continue to love as before. This need to know our origins is instinctive and essential to our sense of identity and belonging. It is therefore understandable that when a child learns that its real parents belong to a nation different from the one it has been raised in, it is likely to be drawn to that other nation's culture, and identify with it. This can cause difficulties that are made worse when differences of race are added to those of nationality. The experience of many children involved in cross-race adoptions is one of confusion in adulthood due to conflicting communal identities and loyalties. Having been immersed in one culture from birth and having had that identity imprinted on them they find it difficult, if not impossible, to feel totally part of another culture to which they are subsequently drawn. They cannot overcome the fact that the first all-important immersion in a communal identity is a one-off experience. In a similar way, children with parents of the same race but different nationality have to deal with conflicting attractions and loyalties. However, the problem is usually not so great for them because they are generally drawn to, and accepted by, at least one of the nations to which they are linked by kinship. A child raised in the national homeland, culture and language of one parent is likely to be drawn to that nation and be accepted by it. However, physical appearance can sometimes play a more important part than upbringing in determining which community a person is drawn to and which community accepts them. If a person's physical or cultural characteristics differ greatly from the norm for a particular nation, that person is unlikely to seek acceptance in it or to be accepted by it. Liberals feel the need to put a positive slant on these things and suggest that children with parents of different nationality or race have the advantage of two identities and two cultures. But is it really possible to immerse oneself in two cultures, identify with two histories, feel an insider in two communities, and, more difficult still, be accepted as a full member of two communities? The answer is probably, no.

To feel an insider and be accepted as an insider it is usually necessary for a person to be immersed in the culture of that community from birth and to be free of traits that would cause that person to be seen as an outsider. A nation is an extended family and like a family it has a life greater than that of any single member. Nations, like families, are bound together by the bonds of empathy and loyalty that come from a shared identity. Those bonds are not only with the living but also with those who have gone before and those who are yet to come. That link between past, present and future encourages the living members of a national community to protect the memory of earlier generations and safeguard the position of future generations. That sentiment is not something that can be learned or feigned.

Citizenship
Using nationality as a synonym for citizenship can cause confusion and misunderstanding. Nationality denotes membership of a particular community, while citizenship denotes membership of a civic-society. The two identities are sometimes complementary (in nation-states) and sometimes they conflict or have no close association (in multi-nation-states). A civic identity is like a national identity in that it is usually acquired at birth with no opportunity available for opting out or negotiating terms. Those who were born in the Soviet Union usually acquired Soviet citizenship and, like other Soviet citizens, became a part of Soviet society and were subject to the rules of the Soviet state, which like other states deemed that it had the right to demand obedience and loyalty in certain things. Soviet citizens also belonged to a nation (e.g. Russian, Latvian, Armenian) and a family, both of which are communities that endure despite the coming and going of states. In a similar way, a British citizen (more properly called a British subject ) might be English, Scottish, Welsh, Nigerian, Bangladeshi, Jamaican, Italian or a member of any nation you care to mention.

Citizenship indicates a person's relationship with a state (political structure) and is usually defined in a legalistic form of words that is embodied in the state's constitution. Nationality indicates a person's relationship with a nation (community and its culture) and cannot be formally defined. Each state determines who are its citizens and how non-citizens can qualify for citizenship. The acquisition of citizenship is a legal formality that gives an individual civic rights and obligations. It is a legal procedure and because of that it is possible to be a citizen of two or more states and have dual citizenship, which is often inaccurately termed, dual-nationality. Some states permit their citizens to hold dual citizenship but others do not.