Tuesday 3 January 2012

Modern Britain - a view

There was a country that no longer believed in itself, I think that it was called Britain

What is this idea called Britain that so many of our fellow citizens are ready to throw away on the scrapheap of petty-nationalism in search of a mythical England, Scotland or Wales (or even regional identity) that never existed, or squander our common heritage in the vain hope that the European camel will fly with all its passengers intact? Whereas only this earth and island of Britannia is a palpable reality. Britain was historically divided by Roman walls and administrative partition, and the limits of Anglo-Saxon centralized administration, but not by any separation of geography or of the inhabitants of this island beyond political expediency. None of Britain’s constituent members could have carved out an empire, been at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution or resisted foreign invasion alone. The reunion of Britain was dreamed of in the Middle Ages by Scots and English alike and is part of our cultural heritage. The union is currently a reality because a Scottish monarch, with Welsh and Irish ancestry, sits on the English throne and is symbolic of every man, women and child from Lands End to John O’Groats, and from Conway to Dover. No one wants Westminster to rule Scotland or Wales, but that Westminster should be ruled as much by Scottish and Welsh as by English interests. That is to say, a union of we British is best for all concerned as long as it is not an unequal one. Oh, but, what a tragedy it would be if the soul of Albion were only discovered, at last, after the dismemberment of the body. Is it too late?

The present has been marred, the future compromised and the lessons of the past ignored by successive generations under the spell of modernism. This is not to say that we should not move forward, strive for improvement or utilize the latest discoveries for the benefit of our people, but we should not make a religion out of modernism, which is the enemy of the future not its friend. Remember that what is most commonly associated with the word ‘modern’, such as plain uncluttered form, abstract art and a belief that technology and genetics will solve all our problems, originated in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century and not the twenty first. The result was eugenics and two world wars and is that we can now efficiently diagnose diseases that we still cannot cure, can kill billions of innocent people in a matter of minutes and can communicate inane nonsense around the whole world almost instantly. Although modernism is outmoded and has had its day, we are all victims of modernism, which has been the curse of civilization for a hundred years and more. Unfortunately, although Nazi Germany was defeated in 1945, fascism had already entered into the soul of western civilization robbing it of its humanity and reason. The victorious powers had already been tainted by a perversion of science and nature that belonged to the first half of the 20th century, and dragged the old new religion of modernism and relativism into the modern age. Without a belief in the absolute we are ruled by the particular. We are divided and so ruled by an illusion of self interest and what we falsely perceive to be the true interests of others.

The world has moved on and we have followed it rather than moved at our own pace in the direction of our own national interest – which can only be the interests of all our people, the land in which we have our home, and all the peoples of the earth regardless of their attitude to us. There is now no British vernacular anything and certainly no Englishness left of which anyone can be proud. No modern architecture that sits comfortably in an English village or Scottish Glen; no accent but that thrown up carelessly where the Thames meets the tide; and no retail outlet, agriculture or industry that speaks the language of its country of birth or adoption. We are no longer governed: we are monitored and managed like so many sheep who cannot remember signing up to join a flock. We have been granted rights (that are in reality privileges), but have lost our fundamental individual liberties that our forebears regarded as their own as a result of birth in ‘this other Eden’. But, what ‘less happier lands’ remain that are democracies? We are told that we live in a peaceful, caring society, but see discourtesy, violence and avarice everywhere. We are no longer taught was caring is. We have institutionalized compassion that takes our humanity from us, and uses guilt to extract money and therefore no real love for our neighbors. Although mountains of legislation and political correctness have been introduced to force our people to be obediently mild - without a supporting morality - violence and disrespect are endemic in our society, especially among those brought up in these enlightened times. If this is a free society (and I doubt that it is), it isn’t cheap. Education is rarely valued for its own sake, but only as a means to acquire a career that it is assumed will pay well. As a consequence, we have a glut of aspiring executives and media consultants, but few young people who know very much or can actually do anything. It is not surprising that the British care so little about Britain if they care so little about each other, the lovely British earth on which they dwell, the flora and fauna with which they share their lives, or even themselves beyond the gratification of only four of their senses.

It is evident that the essentials of British rural community life are disappearing. The post office, the church and the pub have long been the centres of village life and of vital importance to the local community and surrounding area. It is true that not everyone goes regularly to church or the pub, but everyone uses the post office/general store. Rural churches, pubs and post offices have all been closing to the detriment of community life and cohesion. Villages that have lost their church, pub and post office are sad almost desolate places. Where is the focus of a village without these services (for essential services they are) and is a village a village without them? It is not an exaggeration to claim that the closure of more post offices would be an anti-social act the consequences of which cannot be predicted. Surely there is a good case for subsidising these services to ensure the continuance of peaceful community life in rural areas. It might even be an idea to make conversion or closure of these services the subject of fines. Our villages, hamlets, farms and the countryside itself are central to our environmental concerns as they are on our doorstep and currently under threat from satellite suburbs and encroachments on the green belt that threaten not only the natural habitat and our wellbeing, but also threaten to overwhelm infrastructures and burden local services. New houses mean more roads, more traffic, more superstores and garages, infilling with more houses/offices leading to more roads, and so on. The effects on the water table, pollution, etc. can be imagined. The countryside is not just an urban amenity, the bits one goes through to get to another town, it is what’s left of the land itself – the living organs of our little island home.

No comments:

Post a Comment