Annual rant, please excuse.

[fu_manchu12]

I couldn't quite believe it: Brown Promotes BritishnessLeaving aside the obvious 'Labour-Party-bunch-of-traitors-hardly-in-any-position-to-preach-patriotism' point, he appears to be saying that the best way to celebrate Britishness is, er, to copy the Americans. Good thinking, Gordon

Comments

[ex_swan_son]

This amuses me somewhat since in Germany we have the problem that since WWII, any sign of patriotism is deemed as dangerous. Germany still does not seem to be sure of its position in the world these days, and patriotism is equated to dangerous neonazis. No one really knows where the balance lies.

[knirirr]

Brown is sort-of on the right lines, as it is often assumed that the union flag is a symbol only of right-wing socialism when this is not the case.
However, it seems rather cheeky of him to go on in this manner, considering that the deline of which you speak could be attributed to excessive state interference in society.

[synergetic]

It disturbs me that they're quoting US patriotism as an example, because it seems to me that US patriotism is becoming a shield behind which the government can hide from all criticism.

I have issues with any government that attempts to promote patriotism without mentioning the major problem that has always been inherent with patriotism: that patriotism is love of one's country and never should be blind unquestioning belief in the superiority or moral certitude of one's country. All too often in the past, one has been confused with the other and the results have not been good.

[dyddgu]

Thank you - this is very interesting indeed. I'm finding it highly amusing (or scary) that people are having a go at Gordon for saying this whilst being Scottish, thereby displaying a complete lack of knowledge about the place of the (lowland) Scots in the formation of the modern "nation" of Britain. Your argument is very persuasive, and I like it - though I do still know deep down somewhere that people need signs and symbols in order to have some sort of investment in the imagined community of a nation - or they always have done. I wonder are we too cynical to do that any more? Signs, ceremonies, and invented traditions have been the glue that's held it all together so far...

[fu_manchu12]

Symbols are good - but I've always viewed them as being results of patriotism, not causes of it. I would agree that people today are too cynical to believe in symbols alone (and those who do believe in symbols alone often aren't the kind of people I'd like to have on my side *cough*Sunreaders*cough*)

[dyddgu]

Current thinking (as far as I've come across it, anyway) tends to think the opposite of you. I'm currently inclined to agree to an extent. This is where you get the whole "Invented Traditions" thing from; granted, there has to be a certain amount there to begin with, but then you need the symbols and the rituals for it to crystallise around, like those blue crystals that form on a string in a jar (if you had that sort of kit, that is!) Hobsbawm and Ranger's The Invention of Tradition is the one to read on this. Fantastic read, as well, with some amusing pictures of George IV dressed up as a Wee Heelan' Laddie...

[fu_manchu12]

Well, I will admit that the problem with my point of view is that it's no help to anyone. You can't produce reasoned, considered and healthy patriotism to order; a flag, however, can be procured with very little effort and, to the untrained eye, has more effect. Certainly to the untrained voter it has more effect, which means a lot to any government.