Evaluate_the_Claim_That_British_Identity_Is_Defined_by_Shared_Values.

The aim of this assignment is to evaluate the claim that British Identity is defined by shared values. I will examine national identity and how we cannot attribute Britishness down to its traditions (pomp and ceremony), rituals or even by its flag. I will do this by looking at extracts published by the Government and by independent theorists. Over time British identity has diversified; I will therefore take into consideration how its shared values and diversity has become incorporated into our personal identities. The UK is known under many titles such as Great Britain and under its proper title United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. A Governmental Booklet (Home Office 2007, p1, cited in Clarke, 2009, p210), written for people trying to gain British citizenship states that national identity and citizenship in UK do not always mean the same thing. Depending on where we are geographically they are all British citizens, though their nationality can be Scottish or Welsh and in Northern Ireland it can be British, Irish or even British/Irish. Depending on what cultural allegiances, historical events (Battle of the Boyne 1690 or Easter Rising 1916) and political influences that is present in their communities. Unlike other nations that have distinct traditions, dialects, and religious convictions the United Kingdom is made up of separate nation-states that have their own deeply ingrained cultures and values that are both ethnically and religiously diverse. For some to be classed as British is really about claiming superiority of England and the English (Kumar,2001) and can raise questions about people’s rights to hold a national identity. This is also raised by Sociologist Bhikhu Parekh, he believes that England, Scotland and Wales are at a turning point in their history and that they will go one of two ways either become stagnant and alienate each other or as a nation they can renew and sustain their communities. However social scientist Vron Ware states in his studies that was funded by the British Council. That it is clear to be seen that Britishness is viewed in a different light. It is seen to be a “composite nation that is a patchwork of anomalies, mistakes and inconsistences (Clarke, 2009, p210). That United Kingdom has a standing army but not a football team and that it has a Queen, an anthem and flag but no patron saint of UK or founding date of an original constitution to be celebrated with even token formality” as Ware states in his finally sentence “Welcome to modern Britain”. About his own identity Ware states that depending on the circumstances he normally identifies himself in a certain way, but by stating these facts that they do not really convey his feeling about his nationality. That declaring he is a British Citizen are purely consequential and can only benefit matters of social, political and policy implications. Allowing an individual the opportunity to access state provided health care and welfare benefits. In an interview with Pratap a British born filmmaker (Ware, 2007, p30-2 cited in Clarke, 2009, p213) Ware states that Pratap classes himself as Londoner and that he will explain if need be that he has Indian origin and his parents where brought up in East Africa. That he believes that for his generation it is important that people state that they are British and are involved in reinventing Britishness to reflect a more place that is more open and plural. In pratap words “Why should Britishness be hijacked by Patriots and Jingoists”. He also states that he could not take a citizenship test now as he could not swear allegiance to the royal family as he doesn’t agree with the hereditary principle and why it has to be defined to be Britishness. A persons national identity can also change depending on a their circumstances (e.g. ex-pats, people with dual nationality, asylum seekers, refugees, migrant workers and also children who have a parent that is a British Citizen), one example that is in the news at the moment is British Olympian Mo Farrah. Farrah was born in Mogadishu to a British father and Somali mother and spent the majority of his childhood in Djibouti, at 8 years of age he moved to Britain and in the 2012 Olympics he competed for GB and proceeded to win two gold medals in track events. At the end of each event he held up high the union flag therefore emphasising his British nationality. A British identity is made up of many intricate and complex parts. It cannot solely be identified by a person’s family, gender, class, ethnic or peer groups but instead it is part of our own personal identity. It can be not only part of our daily routine (Full English breakfast) but can also be as a direct result of built in factors like; Culture, e.g Shakespeare, Austen, Constanble and Elgar. Which itself can be quite vague and has different connotations and can be connected with ‘high culture’ the artistic or aesthetic cultural products that are put together to form a national culture. In fact British culture is in some ways romanticize and historian Raymond Williams describes it as 'selective tradition' that celebrates some types of works whilst ostracizing others. Though everyday habits and values can also be classed a ‘way of life’. Language, national consensus, our national emblems, national colours they all form parts of what we call our national territory and as a nation we have clearly defined borders that make us unique from other national Territories. By having a national identity on a whole tends to strengthen a country or nation that is threatened by terrorism or militarily. The sense of belonging to the nation is essential as an external threat becomes clearer when individuals seek to unite with fellow countrymen to protect themselves and fight against the common threat. The Falkland Islands is roughly 7920 miles apart from United Kingdom but it still classes itself to be a British (English diaspora). Following an invasion by the Argentinean army of the self-governing overseas territory in 1982, the Falkland Islanders asked the British Government to intervene as most of population are of British descent and wanted to remain as British citizens. The British Government in answer to the call of the islanders sent the British Army to help defeat the Argentine forces and restore freedom to the islanders and in 1983 the British Government supported a claim for a UK policy (British Nationality Act 1983) to supports the islanders' self-determination to remain British citizens. In an article wrote by David Blunkett whilst UK Home Secretary depicted that Britishness is not defined by ethnic or exclusive grounds but on shared values (Blunkett, 2005, p4 cited in Clarke, 2009 p.221) and is brought to the fore by institutes like Open University and NHS. In 2007 Trevor Philips (chairman of Commission of Racial Equality) also emphasises that Britishness is open to everyone and that it is not exclusive and that it can be classed as a ‘Diverse Society’ and its shared values are the fundamental glue that binds us together and are expressed in the way we interact with each other rather than by institutions. Both Blunkett and Phillips views can be shared but can also be challenged by other aspects of British life. Inequalities of income and wealth are brought to the fore when claims of egalitarianism are placed parallel to cases of discrimination and hate crimes against minority groups are also brought to the fore. Whilst editor of the Prospect David Goodhart wrote about the relationship between national identity, diversity and solidarity “It has evolved drastically over the last three centuries of homogenisation and gone through periods of change and renewal.eg, industrialisation, (Goodhart, 2004 p.1 Clarke, 2009, P.225) urbanisation, nation building and war” and with decades of peace, increased wealth and mobility have allowed for greater diversity in lifestyles and values. Goodhart uses the term ‘value diversity’ has been added to ethnic diversity and this came about by two big waves of immigration. One from the commonwealth 1950-60’s and then in 1990’s came the asylum-driven migrants, Goodhart believes that if diversity continues to increase that common culture will be eroded and then that allows solidarity and sharing to conflict with diversity. On a whole British identity can be sometimes abstract and blurred together and seen by other nations in a rather whimsical stereotypical view. Most British people would rather be seen as ethnically and multi-racial diverse, tea drinkers, tree hugging people that are polite, helpful and politically correct individuals. But in reality sometimes they are depicted as all being white Caucasian with skin head haircuts and are football mad drunken loud mouthed louts. In reality the United Kingdom is no longer just seen as a shared place of residence with racial prejudice. Instead we are now a multi-racial and diverse culture living under one national identity that is incorporated into a person's own identity to help create a sense of belonging to one state or nation. British Identity cannot be defined by any one definition. It has changed and diversified over time to allow for cultural, ethical and traditional and values. That has come about due to the migration of people from other nations settling in the United Kingdom. Even if you were born in another country and emigrated to United Kingdom if your allegiances lie with the United Kingdom and that person is then made a British Citizen then that should not make you as individual believe that your identity is any less important that a person born it United Kingdom.