Home Topics in Depth Foreign Affairs Brexit unleashed an English nationalism that has damaged the union with Scotland

  • Jefferson23 (4359 posts)
    Profile photo of Jefferson23

    Brexit unleashed an English nationalism that has damaged the union with Scotland

    As a system of beliefs the new nationalism is much more appropriate to an English nation state than to a more diverse United Kingdom
    Patrick Cockburn

    2 hours ago

    Brexit is English nationalism made flesh, but the English underrate its destructive potential as a form of communal identity. Concepts like “nationalism” and “self-determination” have traditionally been seen as something that happens to foreigners. An English failing today is an inability to recognise the egocentricity implicit in such nationalism and the extent to which it alienates and invites confrontation with other nations in the British Isles and beyond.

    A classic example of this blindness to the consequences of this new type of nationalism came this week when Theresa May denounced Nicola Sturgeon for “playing politics with the future of our country” in demanding a second referendum on Scottish independence. This immediately begs the question about the nature and location of this “country” to which such uncritical loyalty is due. If the state in question is the UK, then why do the advocates of Brexit ignore the opposition – and take for granted the compliance – of Scotland and Northern Ireland in leaving the EU?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-scottish-referendum-english-nationalism-damaged-union-for-good-a7635796.html

    bemildred, Koko, PADemD and 6 othersDoremus Jessup, Herman4747, HeartoftheMidwest, OzoneTom, Haikugal, azurnoir like this

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

  • azurnoir (1990 posts)
    Profile photo of azurnoir Donor

    1. Not surprising at all , almost from the moment Brexit passed

    there was speculation as to how this would affect Scotland’s relationship with the rest of the UK

    why do establishment Democrats appear to be 'progressive' only when dominated by republicans? 
    • Jefferson23 (4359 posts)
      Profile photo of Jefferson23

      2. True, it's sad.

  • bemildred (3086 posts)
    Profile photo of bemildred Donor

    3. The Twentieth Century was not good for empires and autocrats.

    The Twenty-first looks to be much worse.  I think the rising nationalism is largely a response to those empires (USSR for one, British for another, and let’s face it we are not doing well here either. I won’t even get into the continental wannabes or what happened to the Ottomans and Chinese.) failure to govern well, at home or abroad, people don’t like to identify with losers and jerks. (Someone tell the DNC, they don’t seem to know.)

    And let’s face it, this is the period of most rapid change in all of human history, some volcanoes maybe excepted. We’ve gone exponential, some of us even think that’s going to be good.

    It ain't the things you don't know that hurts you, it's the things you know that ain't so.
    • Jefferson23 (4359 posts)
      Profile photo of Jefferson23

      4. We're not doing well at all but have a chance to revitalize through awareness

      via examples of blatant corruption..Trump is not subtle in that regard. But as you say, (Someone tell the DNC, they don’t seem to know.)…. their intentions are anything but admirable and may be the block to reform more so than anything Trump will try to prevent. How much more is lost before a political force can dial it back…not eviscerate it? I don’t know.