Oath Of Allegiance

[Chinahand]

I have to say I find this whole idea countary to my ideas of what Britishness is about.

 

BBC Link

 

The Politicians and the establishment don't have a monopoly on what Britishness is, and to make the swearing of some oath to a throne a defining characteristic of Britishness annoys me.

 

British values are no longer based around allegience, they are based around community and tolerance.

 

I have strong republican leanings, and have no faith, and find the claims of church and establishment to be able to define what is the essence of Britain disturbing.

 

And is it only me, but if the Tories were still in and proposing this idea wouldn't the labour Party be ridiculing this little farce as pumped up jingoism?

[Lonan3]

It's a nonsensical idea that would probably produce more division than unity. It might also damage the status of the monarchy (not necessarily a bad thing!) once it was discovered that there was far less support for the anachronistic institution than most right-wing newspapers proclaim there to be.

Personally, I feel no sense of 'loyalty' to the British German English throne.

[Albert Tatlock]

British values are no longer based around allegience, they are based around community and tolerance.

I would say British values have always been based on community and tolerance, though I would consider 'allegiance' more a product of war and conflict.

 

Years ago different British communities had much in common, in terms of colour, religion, language (and therefore values) etc. etc. Communities were closer, looked after each other, and those communities often easily grouped together under one flag when required, or when asked to do so. The indication of that commonality of community (and allegience when required) was parliament and the monarchy, a system they all could operate under.

 

The problem now is that we have a number of disparate groups of communities that are wholly different from each other, and some simply do not want to adopt the culture of the others (for predominately religious or non-religious reasons), and/or only tolerate the others provided the values, religion/non-religion and culture of those other communities are not forced onto their own community. This has resulted in ghettoisation, and a far more rigid separation of different British communities.

 

The real question today should be 'what does a 56 year old white electrician from Portsmouth have in common, with an 18 year old second-generation UK-born practising Muslim (with Pakistani grandparents) from Bradford?'. The answer is IMO...other than perhaps working in the same place 9-5, very little.

 

There are few inter-community relationships or common ground between these communities (including often even language barriers) - other than through government initiatives trying to bond these communities together by doing things such as debating 'British Values', which are currently as successful as a scientist trying to mix oil and water. One community accepts parliament and the monarchy as leader, the other only the stone-age values of, and allegiance to, Allah. The situation is further complicated and aggravated by government foreign policy, which in effect has seen a government - dominated by one community - 'at war' in the 'homeland' (in a religious context) of the other - even spawning home-grown British terrorists killing other British citizens - and dividing those communities even further.

 

Over time, as these communities grow, they will all expect to be part of the common government that rules us all. But what happens when there is little or no commonality to be had, just as there is little commonality between the disparate cultures now rooted firmly in the UK? What happens when the majority want Allah to run the country? The first sign of this issue came recently with a debate on Shar'a law being adopted in the UK - so surely, as these disparate communities grow, having this debate again is only a matter of time away?

 

The oaths of allegiance have already been sworn by the 1 - 2 million muslims living in the UK, and that allegiance is to Allah. No matter what Gordon Broon says he won't be able to change that IMO.

 

If we are going to have this debate, let's at least be honest with ourselves as to why we are having it.

[bluemonday]

Oath Of Allegiance,

Silly idea?

 

Yes.

[Skeddan]

British values are no longer based around allegience, they are based around community and tolerance.

I would say British values have always been based on community and tolerance, though I would consider 'allegiance' more a product of war and conflict.

Allegiance is linked with sovereignty, nationhood, and political community. War and conflict is more a product of nations and states rather than allegiance being a product of these.

 

I don't know about British values, but allegiance to the political community (with reciprocal rights, liberties, toleration, and freedoms) is still fairly fundamental principle - it is assumed by virtue of birth, or can be adopted, and even visitors are considered as owing a temporary local allegiance in return for the protection and rights afforded to them by the Crown. It doesn't have to be formally sworn to be considered as applying (at least by the state) but sometimes is required on naturalisation and for citizenship.

 

I personally dislike the idea of an oath of allegiance, but maybe its value is in bringing home the reciprocal rights and responsibilities between citizen and state / subject and Crown / citizen and political community.

 

My inclination would be to make it clearer there is an opt out - i.e. if e.g. a Muslim does not believe he should abide by the laws of the state and does not feel bound by them, then they should renounce allegiance - and with it their citizenship, residency or visitor rights - and depart to foreign parts.

[Hugh Jampton]

Here! here!

[Declan]

Seems very un-British.

[manxblue]

Why ?. What purpose will it serve. Complete waste of time. Far to "American" for my liking.

 

If the "authorities" want to bring us all in line, which was my immediate thought to this pish, then surely

they would be better off running the country properly and dealing with the real and existing proiblems we have, namely, soaring crime (despite the manipulated figures), unemployment (depsite the manipulated figures) and the state of the N.H.S. hospitals which are a f*****g disgrace !, rather than another headline seeking load of f*****g sh**e !!.

 

Aaaaaahhhh !, feel much better now and counting my blessings that I live here on our beautiful little piece of heaven away from the f**k-Wits "across.

 

Good night, and wrap up warm, it's stormy outside .....

[La_Dolce_Vita]

This current preoccupation that Gordon Brown has with patriotism, citizenship, and nationality really irritates me. You can see it in his recent statements that the public should support the troops (whatever that means) in Iraq and should give them gratitude, etc.

Lord Goldsmith believes that an oath would give a sense of belonging to teenagers? How could it? And how would he know what difference it would make to teenagers.

It is all so artificial but worse I think it is a repugnant idea to swear allegiance to the monarchy and the state. It is clearly what he thinks is important for teenagers to have a belonging to. I think ideas like this fit in very well with the increasinging state control in the UK. I would have less concerns about oaths of allegiance to the monarchy as anyone would just see it is worthless and silly. But an oath to the state could be easily seen to be important and necessary without questioning whether the current state is actually necessary in itself or a good thing.

 

British values are no longer based around allegience, they are based around community and tolerance.

There are few inter-community relationships or common ground between these communities (including often even language barriers) - other than through government initiatives trying to bond these communities together by doing things such as debating 'British Values', which are currently as successful as a scientist trying to mix oil and water. One community accepts parliament and the monarchy as leader, the other only the stone-age values of, and allegiance to, Allah. The situation is further complicated and aggravated by government foreign policy, which in effect has seen a government - dominated by one community - 'at war' in the 'homeland' (in a religious context) of the other - even spawning home-grown British terrorists killing other British citizens - and dividing those communities even further.

 

I agree with your 'observations' on the divisions in society. I think it is shame that there is so much separation between the different communities in society but mixing of the cultures does happen to a large degree, it happens all the time in various places and in various circumstances. I am not sure whether I think that the situation is a dire as many seem to think. It is true that white, British communities may have fractured over the last few decades but I see little that is sinister about the future.

 

I don't think that the 'British' allegiance to parliament and the monarchy is better than stone age 'allegiance' to Allah.

I mean I don't have much respect for religion but the monarchy is similarly an ancient tradition that should be done away with and the British parliament is, for me, hardly a system that should engender much respect or obedience.

 

Over time, as these communities grow, they will all expect to be part of the common government that rules us all. But what happens when there is little or no commonality to be had, just as there is little commonality between the disparate cultures now rooted firmly in the UK? What happens when the majority want Allah to run the country? The first sign of this issue came recently with a debate on Shar'a law being adopted in the UK - so surely, as these disparate communities grow, having this debate again is only a matter of time away?

 

The oaths of allegiance have already been sworn by the 1 - 2 million muslims living in the UK, and that allegiance is to Allah. No matter what Gordon Broon says he won't be able to change that IMO.

 

If we are going to have this debate, let's at least be honest with ourselves as to why we are having it.

 

Even if the majority want Allah to rule the country I doubt we have much to fear. If the rule of the majority is what is threatened then it would be time to do away with such rule, but that is a question for the future. The majority do not rule at present and the powers that be are certainly not Muslim.

We are talking about disparate communities, not just Muslims, and even when we are talking about Muslims it is not necessarily the case that they would all favour a religious government (though I may be wrong).

 

As I mentioned above, I honestly believe that the whole debate about patriotism and citizenship is nothing more than the government trying to win support for further state expansion and specifically support for the Labour Party. I think it is a cynical attempt to respond to people's fears regarding their community by accepting the common belief that it is multiculturalism that is to blame. I don't think it is.

[Lonan3]

Although the 'Oath of Allegiance' may have grabbed the headlines, I actually find The creation of a new National Citizens’ Corps, whose members would provide advice to others on training and development for citizenship more alarming, and Setting up a new "Deliberation Day" to be held before each General Election to encourage political debate and other events every bit as barmy.

[Albert Tatlock]

Although the 'Oath of Allegiance' may have grabbed the headlines, I actually find The creation of a new National Citizens’ Corps, whose members would provide advice to others on training and development for citizenship more alarming, and Setting up a new "Deliberation Day" to be held before each General Election to encourage political debate and other events every bit as barmy.

That'll be Gordon Broon's version of the Hitler NuShite youth.

 

[Miss Take]

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am), but don't Americans pledge allegiance to their flag? To them the Stars and Stripes represents something solid, a national identity that they are proud to carry with them if when they visit other countries.

 

Pledging allegiance to the queen certainly would not have the same pride reinforcing effect, given that so much of the population think they're a waste of space.

 

They'd need to pledge allegiance to something else, but what? Something that's thought of across the world as essentially British.

 

We pledge allegiance to....

 

Bad teeth?

Jonathon Ross?

Cricket?

Jonny Wilkinson? (perhaps not after his performance last weekend)

Chips, cheese and gravy (more Manx than British, though, but gets my vote)

[Jimcalagon]

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am), but don't Americans pledge allegiance to their flag?

 

School children do it every morning at the start of lessons. Get yer brainwashing in early seems to be the lesson from America.

[bluemonday]

Although the 'Oath of Allegiance' may have grabbed the headlines, I actually find The creation of a new National Citizens’ Corps, whose members would provide advice to others on training and development for citizenship more alarming, and Setting up a new "Deliberation Day" to be held before each General Election to encourage political debate and other events every bit as barmy.

 

Someones been reading 1984 at No. 10

[Freggyragh]

Seems this attack on freedom of thought is part of a worldwide trend , not just something dreamt up by the Stalinistas running NuLiebour.

 

Are NuLiebour doing this because:

 

A) They are obsessed with 'Britishness' because their noses are in a trough marked 'UK', but are no longer wanted in either Scotland or England.

 

B) They want to stir up patriotism to US levels, so questioning their moronic foreign policy becomes 'un-British'.

 

C) The last bit of socialism left in them is the nastiest - a belief in a state planned culture.

 

D) They need the monarchy to mean something so that the discredited honours system means something.

 

or all of the above?