New at Reason

David Weigel | September 14, 2006

Michael Young cuts through the fog of British politics and finds a country that's struggling to remain relevant.

Comments

|9.14.06 @ 1:21AM|#

"premature retirement"? Blair's had a pretty good run as things go.

|9.14.06 @ 5:31AM|#

Looks like Cameron's just lifted Fukuyama's latest book (UK title After the Neo-Cons / US title America at the Crossroads).

|9.14.06 @ 6:08AM|#

Interesting: Tony Blair rode the crest of Britpop to power, and then that musical movement had virtually no impact on anything whatsoever outside the isles. Now that the "indie" of The Libertines, Franz Ferdinand, and Arctic Monkeys et al has reclaimed Britain's rightful place at the top of the rock ladder, Tony's going out with a whimper.

|9.14.06 @ 6:40AM|#

JK--Very good observation, and particularly evident in Cameron's call for new institutions to deal with new problems and new security challenges to be faced.

|9.14.06 @ 7:38AM|#

I think the idea of 'struggling to remain relevant' is perfectly put. Once the UK learns to relax and not worry about being a big cheese then I think we'll all be a lot happier. I want us to be like the Scandies or Spaniards. They're a bunch of happy little buggers.

|9.14.06 @ 9:42AM|#

"After earlier agreeing with the U.S. administration to delay a ceasefire, in order to give Israel more time to weaken Hezbollah..."

Lord, please protect Israel from its friends.

"It's that no matter how divisive Bush's foreign policy has been, no matter how unpopular with British voters, it is very difficult for both Labor and the Conservatives to deny its basic tenets."

Basic tenet #1: wars to topple dictators will produce stabele, western-oriented, liberal democracies in those countries.

Basic tenet #2: those wars, and their aftermath, with strengthen democratic movements throughout the region, and bring about democratic reform.

Basic tenet #3: wars to pre-empt threats that don't yet exist will make us safer.

Basic tenet #4: abandoning our policy of working with and through established international institutions (the UN in Desert Storm, NATO in the Balkans) will result in more effective operations, and will allow us to concentrate on the most important problems facing us.

Yep, who could deny any of that?

The desire to spread democracy, rather than rely on realpolitik balance of power calculations, has been the foundation of foreign policy liberalism for decades. It's what John Kerry and Jimmy Carter were arguing back when Bill Kristol and Ronald Reagan were getting in bed with fascist mass murderers in Latin America and Saddam in the Middle East, and when have you ever heard a neoconservaive criticize that? They keep calling themselves "neo-Reaganites," and defending those who attempt coups against insufficiently America-friendly elected leaders.

"And I agree that Western powers should be prepared, in the last resort, to use military force ..." Since when have the neocons supported making military force a last resort?

"More than that, we and others are justified in using pre-emptive force when an attack on us is being prepared, and when all means of peaceful dissuasion and deterrence have failed." Since when have neocons supported reserving deterrence until an attack is being prepared? Since when have they ceased to support military action when there are other means of dissuasion and deterrence availablle?

"Furthermore, I believe that we should be prepared to intervene for humanitarian purposes to rescue people from genocide." Since when have neocons supported humanitarian interventions to end genocide? The two ongoing crises that could amount to genocide are in Darfur and Congo - have you heard the neoconservatives calling for intervention in either of those places?

Listing the examples of neoconservatism being restrained by reality does not demonstrate that the philosophy has been altered by these failures. Have you heard neoconservatives say Iraq was a mistake? That we should have gained UN support? That "regime change" doesn't work? That starting another such war in Iran or Syria is undesireable? I sure haven't.

The only one I see straining to be relevant are the neocon dead enders.

|9.14.06 @ 9:44AM|#

Mark VIII,

Or you could become a state in the United States. That way, you could thumb your nose at Europe and be a great power again. It would also freak out half the planet.

After the state of Britain was established, we'd restore sword ownership to the Scots as their God-given right. Also, you could sell the monarchy to Disney as part of the transaction :) Finally, if the state of Britain is successful, then can the states of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Ireland be far off? Yes, one big English-speaking family with a lovely common-law tradition: The United States of Anglica.

Larry A|9.14.06 @ 10:12AM|#

Finally, if the state of Britain is successful, then can the states of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Ireland be far off? Yes, one big English-speaking family with a lovely common-law tradition: The United States of Anglica.

Interesting. Of course that's a potful of blue states. Or if you admit each state/province/territory seperately, that would be almost 50 new states.

And of course before you really have a complete common-law family you would have to bring Louisiana (the one of the fifty state governments that is based on the Napoleonic Code) into line.

|9.14.06 @ 10:23AM|#

Larry A,

Louisiana's going to become a theme park soon, anyway, once the federal government realizes that we could've moved fifty million people into luxury apartments on the Moon for the cost of rebuilding one city. Gotta recoup the costs somehow.

|9.14.06 @ 10:24AM|#

A Union Jack stripe would look pretty bad @ss on our flag too (mind you there's no more room for stars and 50 is such an even number).

But we'd all have to buy new flags.

|9.14.06 @ 10:29AM|#

The first American flag was raised by Patriot militia in Massachusetts. It had a Union Jack in the top left corner, and the familiar 13 stripes on the field.

It did indeed look badass. Whereas Massachusetts' current flag looks like letterhead - a seal on a white field - I propose we adopt that flag instead.

|9.14.06 @ 10:40AM|#

Cool - I'm looking forward to hearing the national anthem sung in Welsh.

Warren|9.14.06 @ 10:43AM|#

Also, you could sell the monarchy to Disney as part of the transaction

Hey, now there's a great idea. Why hasn't anyone proposed it before.

I also think we need to acknowledge Margaret Thatcher when talking about the Briton/US "special relationship". She and Ronny worked the realpolitik in the common cause of freedom. Somehow I don't see the Iron Lady hitching her wagon to the Neocon's star. As British PM she was too familiar with the perils of imperial fantasies.

|9.14.06 @ 10:50AM|#

Okay, we've got a flag! Anglicavania will soon be a reality!

The flag joe's talking about is the Grand Union flag. There's also a similar flag called the Tauton flag, which says "Liberty and Union" on it. Cool. You can see these flags here.

Americarama?

|9.14.06 @ 11:37AM|#

The Grand Union flag looks a little too much like my home state's flag.

|9.14.06 @ 12:13PM|#

Rather than stooping to conquer, Britain is craning to be relevant.

Thge Brits aren't too different from the French in that regard, though their campaign for geopolitical relevancy is often carried out in a diametrically opposite manner.

|9.14.06 @ 12:13PM|#

Scotland and England should be two separate states. Also, we could change the national anthem to My Country Tis Of Thee since the Brits are know the melody as God Save The Queen.

|9.14.06 @ 12:28PM|#

Thge Brits aren't too different from the French in that regard

That, old bean, is fighting talk.

I now we have bad teeth, bad food and bad weather but we are not fucking pretentious....

|9.14.06 @ 12:44PM|#

I dunno, pip, those tabloids of yours seem to tell a different story. Not to mention that wig habit some of you still have going.

|9.14.06 @ 1:57PM|#

NoStar,

Okay, but are we leaving out Wales and Northern Ireland? We can leave it to the former UKers to decide, but I think one big state would be better.

When Australia joins the Union, we can adopt some AC/DC song as our new national anthem. I can think of several that would be apropos.

|9.14.06 @ 3:41PM|#

When Australia joins the Union...

My random poll of 'strylyuns shows an almost even split between Walzin' Matilda and Bot'ny Bye for the national anthem. Walzin' Matilda is slightly ahead.

|9.14.06 @ 3:44PM|#

Hence, I'm sure they'll never really fit in.

|9.14.06 @ 3:53PM|#

I'm sorry, I've got problems with amalgamating the UK and assorted Commonwealth and ex-Commonwealth states into a great English-speaking union. For one, Britain is a united Kingdom, whereas we are a Republic. Australia held a referendum on becoming a republic, and keeping the monarchy won. It would be kind of odd to have a federation containing lands that tug their forelocks in a monarch's direction, and those who would rather not. There's also that bit about spending 800+ years to toss the sasssenach bastards out of most of Ireland, only to let them in again by the back door. I don't think that's on, even if the USA is the "senior partner" in the new group. Ireland is only "part of the Anglosphere" because of the determination of those in power back when to stamp out Irish (Gaeilge), quite like the various Native American languages were stifled by some of our BIA and missionary types.

An English-Speaking Union was an old hobbyhorse of Winston Churchill, who had both English and U.S. ancestry. If you want a flag for it, I'd suggest quartering the British Union flag (without the ersatz cross of St. Patrick) with the 50-star union of Old Glory, a Maple Leaf and the Southern Cross. Put the U.S part in the canton, the crosses below it, and the Canadian and Austalasian devices next to them. When hung on a wall, the Stars will be in the upper left (the honor position in U.S. tradition) and the British symbol will be in the upper right (the honor position in the UK.)

If Ireland comes in, a Harp could sit dead center. :)

Amusing vexillogical trivia: The Grand Union Flag is virtually identical to that of the British East India Co. (circa 1707-1800). Those were the guys whose tea the Sons of Liberty dumped in Boston Harbor.

Kevin

|9.14.06 @ 3:59PM|#

Oh, and put a Welsh Red Dragon on that new flag. Dragons are kewl!

Kevin

|9.14.06 @ 3:59PM|#

Pro Libertate

I'm surprised we didn't here more of that kind of talk during the Clinton years.

After all, the purpose of Cecil Rhodes' scholarships was to create a cadre of educated men to reunite the United States of America with the British Empire so that English-speaking White Men could retake their rightful place as rulers of the world.

Hasn't worked out that well, has it? I mean, what's the point of a Grand Plan when one of your boys gets made leader of the free world and can't deliver?

Poor old bastard must be spinning in his grave seeing them giving his money to women and blacks though.

|9.14.06 @ 4:24PM|#

sp.: vexillological

Kevin

|9.14.06 @ 4:28PM|#

All I'm talking about is offering statehood under the existing American system. Maybe with some special legislation or amendments to accommodate local customs. Great Britain is populous enough to be influential in Congress as are Australia and Canada. Team USA would do better in soccer, that's for sure.

A dragon on the flag would be a nice touch. Or we could just adopt the Wallace clan crest.

|9.14.06 @ 6:29PM|#

We can keep our national anthym the same. It's set to an old British drinking song so it should be familiar enough.

And it's not really anti-British. I mean all it's about is a fort not being lost; not a great beating of the British.

|9.14.06 @ 7:39PM|#

Great Britain is populous enough to be influential in Congress

Er, England has 50 million people - it would *dominate*.

|9.14.06 @ 9:06PM|#

rhywun, you're forgetting the Senate. Still, that's the incentive for the UK to join--lots of votes in the House. More than even California! To me, that alone makes British statehood worthwhile. That, and the vision of school children in the future trying to cope with the concept of the United States breaking away from Great Britain. . .another state.

|9.14.06 @ 9:24PM|#

Clemsonuee,

Google the second and third verses of the Star Spangled Banner.

Apparently, we're going to wash away the polluting footprint of the British with blood.

No, really. I like the "takes a licking and keeps on ticking" sentiment in the first verse. I really came to appreciate it after September 11th.

But the rest of the song might as well be gangsta rap.