The Student Room Group

What is a 'British Identity'? Is there one?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by laurennmc
Sat watching Question Time (exciting, I know!) and the question has just arose of whether there is such a thing of a British Identity and, if so, what is it? What do you class as a British value?


I think your question should be what "identity" is. You cannot define "British identity" if you don't define the meaning of "identity" first.
Original post by william walker
The North American Proxy which is better know as the US war of Independence was not about reclaiming British freedom or the English Bill of Rights. Those things were co-opted by the Puritans who were supported by the French and Spanish against the Loyalists in North America. The first thing they did was remove the British Monarchy, Anglican Church. Their governmental system after that came from the Union of the States, some of which were Loyalist. What I am saying here is the US Revolution is a lie and opposed to the very governmental system which brought the 13 Colonies freedom. Nothing to do with culture or birthrights, but a geopolitical conflict between France, Spain and Britain. The success of the US comes from the compromise which was reached between the States in forming the US governmental system.


There were puritans in this country who would have quite happily done away with the monarchy and the Anglican church. They had a good go at it, if you remember. Indeed, in that civil war, the majority of students at the newly established Harvard University left to fight for the Parliamentary cause.

Yes the French and Spanish took their advantage to attack the British, but the tinder which set the thing off was taxes, lack of democracy, and the general feeling the Crown was treating its own subjects unfairly. When they declared independence they established the world's most liberal state, under a constitution which lay heavily on the work of British liberal philosophers and a Bill of Rights which was based on that of England. Many in this country were very sympathetic towards the principles of the revolution, and it's not really true to characterise it as a struggle between Britain and France.

And if "The success of the US comes from the compromise which was reached between the States in forming the US governmental system", did their culture not affect any of that?
Original post by Rinsed
There were puritans in this country who would have quite happily done away with the monarchy and the Anglican church. They had a good go at it, if you remember. Indeed, in that civil war, the majority of students at the newly established Harvard University left to fight for the Parliamentary cause.

Yes the French and Spanish took their advantage to attack the British, but the tinder which set the thing off was taxes, lack of democracy, and the general feeling the Crown was treating its own subjects unfairly. When they declared independence they established the world's most liberal state, under a constitution which lay heavily on the work of British liberal philosophers and a Bill of Rights which was based on that of England. Many in this country were very sympathetic towards the principles of the revolution, and it's not really true to characterise it as a struggle between Britain and France.

And if "The success of the US comes from the compromise which was reached between the States in forming the US governmental system", did their culture not affect any of that?


Yep.

That is what happens in Proxy wars an external force takes advantage of an internal problem. No the tinder was the use of the army to enforce the law and shooting of protesters in Boston. Taxation and democracy had nothing to do with it, it was the Puritans excuse to start the rebellion. The North American Proxy war should been seen as part of the conflict between The War of Spanish Succession and The Napoleonic wars. The period after the Seven Years war and the start of the Napoleonic wars where French engaged Britain using proxies from India, North America and Ireland. Similar to the Cold war between the US and Russia.

No it had to do with the way they created their new state.
Identity is a construct. It exists as far as people believe it exists.
Original post by anarchism101
Identity is a construct. It exists as far as people believe it exists.


It is more than that, Identity is a basic facet of a persons psychology
Original post by -Native Briton-
It is more than that, Identity is a basic facet of a persons psychology


Whether true or not, it doesn't refute my point. You could argue that people's minds are particularly prone to seeing themselves and others in some sort of differential identity system, but the actual substance of that identity would remain something to be constructed.
Original post by TurboCretin
It's things like this that make people feel the need to say they're proud to be white.


When have white people been prosecuted just for being white again?
Original post by Катя
When have white people been prosecuted just for being white again?


I think you may mean 'persecuted', but isn't that a slightly ironic question to ask when you've just told someone it's not okay for him to be proud of being white?
Original post by TurboCretin
I think you may mean 'persecuted', but isn't that a slightly ironic question to ask when you've just told someone it's not okay for him to be proud of being white?


Yeah man, that's totally terrible, being told that "proud to be white" is usually the war cry of the KKK / EDL etc :awesome:

Definitely the same as actual discrimination and racial abuse :awesome:

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Катя
Yeah man, that's totally terrible, being told that "proud to be white" is usually the war cry of the KKK / EDL etc :awesome:

Definitely the same as actual discrimination and racial abuse :awesome:

Posted from TSR Mobile


Wrapping a red herring in an appeal to ridicule doesn't give the point credibility. I am hardly comparing your denigration of someone's identity to the horrors of the African slave trade. I am saying that it's counterproductive.

'White pride' is essentially a defence mechanism. If you attack people who say that they are proud to be white, you are fighting fire with petrol.
Original post by TurboCretin
Wrapping a red herring in an appeal to ridicule doesn't give the point credibility. I am hardly comparing your denigration of someone's identity to the horrors of the African slave trade. I am saying that it's counterproductive.

'White pride' is essentially a defence mechanism. If you attack people who say that they are proud to be white, you are fighting fire with petrol.


Defence mechanism against what, exactly?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Erm....is there a food most British people eat regularly? Music? Dance? Stories? Dress? Not really.

So when people say there is no single British culture, then compared to 100 years ago, this is a fact.
British or English ? I am neither, but I do like the English values, well atleast the upper middle class english values. :smile:

But in general English people whether they're natives or not seem to be a polite bunch.
Original post by Катя
When have white people been prosecuted just for being white again?


So you're only allowed to be proud of yourself if your ancestors were persecuted? Ok then...
Original post by Катя
Defence mechanism against what, exactly?

Posted from TSR Mobile


Against the guilt imposed by a legacy of evil - guilt which our society encourages.
doesn't exist
Original post by Zander01
So you're only allowed to be proud of yourself if your ancestors were persecuted? Ok then...


"white pride" makes as much sense as "hetero pride", was my point. yeah, sure, be proud of your heritage and family, but waving a "white pride" flag everywhere (metaphorically speaking) feels a bit off.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending