What English backlash?

ndm

I wonder how much of the recent upsurge of English Nationalism is a response to the needs of Rupert Murdoch to make money off the English football team by convincing people they need indeed must become English nationalists. Fomenting nationalism as a cultural institution almost inevitably spills over into fomenting nationalism as a political institution.

When I visit London now I am always surprised by the quantity of St. George's Crosses I see. Even a couple of decades back St. George's Cross was visible only (as a background to St. Andrew's Cross - just kidding) in the Union Flag. I guess the days when the Union Flag was the English flag are gone.

An English nationalist

Perhaps it's got something to do with the British media's wall of silence on English issues.

Don't worry - the backlash is coming old chum.

fred forsythe (not the)

The English backlash has delined because of the recession. We can no longer go down the pub to whinge.

Stephen Gash

The backlash is suppressed by the media.
It is difficult to hide issues like top-up fees and lack of cancer drugs when everyone in England has a friend or relative affected by the disadvantages heaped upon the English.
I have no loyalty to the United Kingdom because the United Kingdom is disloyal to me.

Stephen Gash

300,000 FaceBook members support St George's Day being a bank holiday. There are several groups of thousands with titles like "I'm English not British" on FaceBook.
Being smug about the lack of a backlash is unwise. The English elastic band of tolerance is a long one, but it doesn't half smack you in the face when it snaps.

Jim Crichton

An English nationalist. you are wrong, there is is no Celtic monopoly of the British media, if any thing it is the reverse. I lay the blame at the doorway of the Daily Mail, they are not a national paper in that that they publish regional issues which frequently contradict each other, but hey it sells. I respect your aspirations, but as as Scot am no longer your enemy.

Lee Jakeman

Undercurrents, dear chap. Undercurrents. The English are pissed off. It's mostly unconscious at the moment, but pissed off they are. None of these opinion polls, social surveys etc, ever capture the UNDERCURRENTS. That's why people like you always get it wrong. English nationalism will suddenly and unexpectedly "take off" just as you least expect it - and then it will be an unstoppable force. As for Jim Crichton's bit about there being no "celtic monopoly" of the British press - well, no-one ever said there was. There is a UNIONIST monopoly of the British press - and it's this that suppresses all issues relating to England. British unionists suppress all and any issues that might make the English more nationalistic like the Scots, Welsh and Irish. British Unionists are terrified of English Nationalism - with good cause, as it is English nationalism that will one day bury them. For good.

Al

In a few international non political forums I have seen people make St George's Day threads which quickly become terrible rows, the argument being that those who celebrate St George (possibly the most multicultural saint out), are racists and bigots. These same people get offended if you complain at them celebrating St Andrew or St Patrick, or even poor, oft neglected St David. Many English people don't even know what date it is and who St George was (he was that foreign bloke who killed Bold Slasher and the Turkish Knight, wasn't he?)

As far as English Nationalism goes, I don't know. British Nationalism seems to be the main focus currently, perhaps the English will become more aware of what is going on if/when the EU are no longer pulling our strings. Personally, I am in favour of a devolved English Parliament, and I would like some of the government fat trimmed to allow it without it just adding to the stack of beaurocracy we currently have to pay for. I don't want a PM who has signed any country's Claim of Right, though an English First Minister who had signed the English one wouldn't hurt.

gadgie

We would have to see the wording
for the question of an English Parliament that brought a 17% response.
If I was asked do you want a seperate English Parliament?
I could only answer that question if I know what the intention is.
If it means another building outside London I would say No.
If it means an English Parliament at Westminster I would say Yes. Politicians and the media portray an English Parliament as another tier of un-necessary government as a means of scaring off the taxpayers.I believe that is how the question will have been worded.
If there is no English backlash
you have nothing to worry about have you?

Gareth Young

The British Social Attitudes research is flawed because is asks:

With all the changes going on in the way different parts of Great Britain are run, which of the following do you think would be best for England?

To which there are three available responses:

a) England should be governed as it is now with laws made by the UK parliament

b) Each region of England should have its own regional assembly that runs services like health

c) England as a whole should have its own new parliament with law-making powers.

The BSA asks the English to choose between a *new* parliament or the UK parliament, which historically is the English parliament, and finds that only 17% would like a *new* English parliament.

It does not measure support for a "parliament within a parliament" (an English Grand Committee) which is the model that commercial polls find most support for.

Asking people to choose between Westminster (England’s traditional parliament) or a new English parliament presupposes that an English parliament must be new and/or distinct (ie not dual purpose).

Also, the BSA do not make it absolutely clear that any ‘new English parliament’ would be a devolved parliament that is subordinate to Westminster (like the Scottish Parliament), if that is indeed the option that they intended to measure support for. They do not specify what law-making powers it should have, that they leave open to interpretation. By 'law-making powers' many respondents will understand that to mean Home Office/Police.

For all the respondents know they are voting for a federation.

A more useful question would be something straight-forward like that which prompted the Scots to vote for a Scottish parliament in 1997:

1. I agree that there should be a Scottish Parliament; or
2. I do not agree that there should be a Scottish Parliament

David Wildgoose

The majority of English say that we should continue to be governed from our traditional Parliament in Westminster, and an even bigger majority say that Scotland should have no part in that rule.

The way I read that is that although one English person in five wants to throw Scotland out of the Union, the majority would accept Scotland remaining in the Union if their MPs are removed from Government.

Sounds fair to me...

Maria

I think it's all down to how the questions are phrased in the British Social Attitudes Report. I want an English Parliament at Westminster, with a vastly honed-down UK Parliament, which perhaps could take turns having sessions at the seats of governance in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Failing that, I want an English Parliament in the Midlands or North of England, housed in an existing building.

It would do away with the West Lothian Question, the Barnett Formula, etc, and still keep the UK together.

The suppression of facts concerning the devolution settlements to the "nations" by the media in England is nothing short of dishonest.

An English Parliament would not mean more MPs or an expensive new building - and need not mean the loss of the traditional English government location at Westminster.