About a year ago Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry stirred up controversy by suggesting that Rishi Sunak, former British Prime Minister, was “not English”. At the time, I tried to write something and failed miserably. The other week the controversy flared up again as Sunak, himself, belatedly commented on the affair. Once again, I tried to write something and once again I failed. I kept tying myself up in knots before coming to the conclusion that it was all a bit futile. The real question – the important question – is whether someone is pro-British or anti-British. Having said that there has to be something to be pro or anti, which implies the existence of Britishness. So what is this Britishness? It is largely ethnic but not entirely. People can join and they can leave.
So, going back to the original question, where does Rishi Sunak fit on this British/pro-British/anti-British spectrum? Well, he’s not British and given his actions in office it is difficult to tell whether he is pro or anti. Next question: what about Keir Starmer?
P.S. I wrote this before watching Kisin’s most recent monologue. Which was a mistake because he does a much better job of explaining the situation before suggesting the obvious solution: re-establish the British Empire.
This post is a good example of one of the difficulties in the example. It starts out talking about Englishness and ends with Britishness. The two are not the same, but it’s easy to slip back and forth between them.
Britishness is easy. It has a legal definition; if one is a British citizen one is British. It’s Englishness that’s difficult. And a large part of that difficulty comes down to whether one is willing, as Kisin is, to include race in the description. That’s the real sticking place: is being white part of being English or not?
You could reasonably argue that the British Empire was a collective idea that had a greater meaning beyond geography and commerce. Apart from some legal consequences the original idea has faded.
And sadly you might also argue that the idea of Englishness has also faded. Still strong in the countryside (and hated by some) but almost completely vanished in the towns.
I don’t think it serves any purpose to try and resurrect those ideas, although I hope a new collective idea will emerge – and it’s not the sycophantic submission to the EU.
Try Carl Benjamin for a different view. Englishness is tied up with ethnicity. British is merely political. Not even an identifiable culture, all are welcome, apparently (though I for one was not consulted).
English is an ethnicity. Most of the people of England are of that ethnicity and some of us reject the notion that someone, anyone, from somewhere else can assert that they are English without any ethnic justification. They are visitors, guests either wanted or unwanted. They can’t have what we have. We can’t escape our ethnicity and adopt another because this is DNA, not politics or culture, although a culture goes with it. And this is our country. It is our home and we have nowhere else to go.