Filter By

Conservatism, the Big Society, and Patriotism

ResPublica Research Assistant and Conservative Councillor Tom Hunt discusses patriotism as core to civic conservatism

The concept of patriotism and its role in fostering shared identity and values, has permeated the British political scene of late. From the rise of Nationalism in Scotland, to euro scepticism in England, to even the Labour Party’s tentative Blue Labour turn, manifested most clearly by David Lammy’s recent comments regarding the death of “god and flag” as a key cause of the London riots. Patriotism in schools, a returning concept demonstrated by the Government’s schools agenda, should be seen as inextricably linked with the increasing realisation that the Nation state is here to stay.

What is clear from the Royal wedding earlier this year, and the way that it galvanised the country, is that there is still a role for patriotism in binding together British society.  It is likely that a new, integrative, inclusive form of patriotism can form a key ingredient in allowing us to ascertain a new set of shared values within our society. The relative lack of disturbances this August within some of the most impoverished communities within Scotland and Wales, also gave an indication of the role that national identity, and patriotism can play in promoting a greater sense of civic responsibility. The recent report, “Reading the riots”, published by the Guardian and the LSE, discovered that 51% of protestors feeling like they were part of British society, compared to a national average of 92%.  The return of debates regarding the positive role that patriotism can play in providing a greater degree of integration between diverse groups within society should be welcomed.

I see the Conservative Party, at is best, as being well placed to make a significant contribution towards the current debates concerning the role of patriotism within our modern, diverse society. However, for the current Conservatives to make sense of, and to lead the existing debates concerning patriotism and national identity, they need to acquire a firm grasp of Edmund Burke’s work. What is clear is that when debating patriotism and Nationalism, the Conservative Party really needs to get its house in order, at least in an ideological sense. At this point in time, the common perception seems to be that the Conservative Party is the mainstream party most closely associated with patriotism, and representing the interests and passions of the Nation. Overall, such a view is understandable. However, it is also my view that unless the Conservative Party are meticulous in providing strong, coherent, ideological foundations for building patriotism and National identity in the future, then such prevailing perceptions, and the current basis of such perceptions are likely to be found wanting. Moreover, the vast majority of people within our country are likely to remain disengaged, and unsure of the worth of striving for a stronger role for National identity and patriotism in the future.

Unfortunately, being a patriot within the Conservative Party is often seen as a Thatcherite tendency. A lot of this makes sense as in many ways Thatcher the individual, was a great Conservative patriot. Unfortunately, however, Thatcherism the ideology, or at least the way in which it is interpreted by many current Conservatives, is a poor ideological foundation for cultivating a greater degree of patriotism and National identity within our country in the future. Trying to build patriotism upon a twisted, individualistic take on Thatcher’s ideological legacy, is the equivalent of trying to build Buckingham Palace on quicksand, with each granule of sand represented a disassociated, “rugged individual”. In essence, equating Patriotism, and a strengthening of National identity, with the Thatcherite wing of the Conservative Party, while simultaneously pursuing neo-liberal economics is destined for failure.

My view is that Conservative views concerning the importance of patriotism in modern society need to be packaged together, and sold alongside the Party’s ideological commitment to the “Big Society”, and the accompanying focus on the importance of strengthening local identity through the localism bill. Clearly, the two things should go hand in hand, in many senses the flourishing of both forms of identity, local and National, are mutually dependent upon each other. Strangely, it seems as though the two agendas, often pursued by different factions of the Party, are rarely seen as being inextricably connected. However, in my eyes, patriotism, and a strengthened National identity can energise the “Big Society”, while the “Big Society” and localism can provide the building blocks of a newly self-confident and patriotic Nation State. In the words of Edmund Burke,

“To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed toward a love to our country and to mankind.”

In many senses, this interpretation by Burke could not correspond more strongly with the current circumstances we found ourselves in now. It is important that the Conservative Party learn from such a view, and adopt a bottom up approach to fostering patriotism within our country.  In essence, it is through building loyalties and shared values between one another through localism and the “Big Society”, and strengthening our commitments to our, “little platoons”, that we can build a new, ideologically coherent modern patriotism and commitment towards the Nation State. Moreover, it’s likely that having done this, feeling confident in the completeness of our identity, that we can build healthier relations with our European neighbours.

For the Conservatives to achieve such a goal, it must embrace its Burkean, civic conservative roots to a greater extent, it can do this by for the first time talking about patriotism in the same breath as the “Big Society”, providing greater unity and coherence within the Party, as well as presenting a compelling narrative linked to “identity” to the electorate. It is through civic conservatism that the Conservatives should talk about patriotism, not libertarianism. Or put differently, it is through a love of the particular, that we come to love and appreciate the general.


Comments on: Conservatism, the Big Society, and Patriotism

Gravatar John Smith 07 January 2012
Great piece, it"s a shame so many of the commentators have linked your mentioning of patriotism and nationalism with insecure belligerence. As the saying goes "the past is a different country" and it would be wrong to reject an interesting proposal due to bad history.
Reply
Gravatar Valerie Valery 16 February 2012
@John Smith: Bad history is generally a good guide. That is why we study history. Patriotism: how do we define it? I love Blighty....and Germany and Norway and Japan....does it boil down to for whom I would fight? Can one be a supporter of global well-being, equality, common purpose, and a "patriot". Research has shown that those who fail at school are more likely to become conservatives, because they feel that their feelings of insecurity around new ideas are catered for.
Hopefully in time they will learn whence their value systems might have originated and how they can embrace equality, co-operation and sharing. Similarly, those who feel threatened by new blood in the gene pool are genetically programmed to defend their patch against anyone "different", partly in response to other members of any group who are programmed to seek out new blood to pep up their offspring. This is the history of patriotism.
Yes, be proud of what you do, but do it partnership with anyone else in the globe; seek out new ideas, mix things up a bit, be a global citizen and break down the jingoistic barriers that still imprison some poor people. Patriotism is the wrong word for loving what we do and sharing best practice with other countries, if that is what you intend - you need a new one Mr Hunt, with its own definition. Packaging patriotism with The Big Society simply reinforces the (nauseating) notion that we do things best in the UK and we have nothing to learn from elsewhere. I can see what you are trying to say - it"s great to feel proud of your own little bit of country and of your leaders if they deserve it. But shared identity now comes from developing ideas, not the constraints of outdated image or from the values of our huntin" shootin" non-PC Royals, (they are pets we keep for our entertainment).
Reply
Gravatar John Doe 28 January 2012
@John Smith: What a fool. Lets not reject communism because of its bad history. John Smith - if thats his true name - is a cretin.
Reply
Gravatar Mark Macho 07 January 2012
@John Smith: So we should not reject communism because of its bad history? We should not reject nazism because of its bad history? Damn right we are insecure. Last time the world played extensively in this sandbox 50 million were killed.
Reply
Gravatar Brian Menzies 07 January 2012
@John Smith: The past is not a different country John. It is what
we learn from or should.
Reply
Gravatar Erasmus 05 January 2012
Young Tom above should read Julien Benda"s "The Treason of the Learned" and/or, John Dewey"s "German Philosophy and Politics" before he so uncritically praises "Patriotism "the assertion of one form of mind against other forms of mind". He might then become aware of how his
current thought process once led to Auschwitz and the Holocaust.
Reply
Gravatar John Kenneth Galbraith 04 January 2012
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man"s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

Reply
Gravatar Oscar Wilde 03 January 2012
"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious"
Reply
Gravatar George Bernard Shaw 03 January 2012
" Patriotism (Tom) is your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born it it"
Reply
Gravatar GBS 03 January 2012
@George Bernard Shaw: "in it" (sorry)
Reply
Gravatar Albert Einstein 02 January 2012
" Heroism on command, senseless violence and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of PATRIOTISM - how passionately I hate them"
Reply
Gravatar Tom Hunt 30 December 2011
@Malcolm Rasala : I really think its nonsense to suggest that being proud in one"s country immediately leads to one believing their own country is superior to others. I think the key distinction here is not between patriotism and nationalism, but between Nationalism (inclusive)/patriotism and chauvinism.

re your point concerning Christianity being incompatible with patriotism, again, I don"t think this view cuts any mustard. Poland is an example of a country which is deeply patriotic whilst being one of the most devout countries in Europe, arguably the most. In fact, many Poles have come to understand their sense of national identity through their religion. And it was that very identity that facilitated the development of Solidarity, a force critical in undermining the foundations of the last great nation denying force (the USSR). Solidarity could have only happened in Poland, and the key reason for this was the development of a shared purpose and identity that transcended potential class based divisions. Much of this purpose and identity, along with the associated civic resilience, came from a concoction of both national and religious sentiment.... Its an imperative that when discussing the role that patriotism can play in the twenty first century we move beyond the typical left-liberal hysteria that has dominated our discussions for too long.
Reply
Gravatar Patriotism & the Pharisees Prayer 02 January 2012
@Tom Hunt:

" I thank God I am not like the rest of men"
Reply
Gravatar Mark Macho 02 January 2012
@Malcolm Rasala: Anyone who knows the history of Poland knows that in its ascendancy Poland was hated by its neighbours as a cruel oppressor. It is only in the period of its dismemberment and suppression that it discovered the virtues of cooperation. Solidarity you will remember, Tom, was founded by trade union officials. The national church gave its support but also betrayed individuals in the confessional as we now know.

Solidarity rejected the right-wing idea that the only way to benefit the country is to worry about one"s-own. It also rejected the leftist idea that one need not worry about the sufferings of individuals if the masses are helped.

Patriotism is worrying about ones fatherland. The essential quality of morals is their appeal to what is universal and because of this patriotism can never be the last word in morality.
Reply
Gravatar Oxford English Dictionary 02 January 2012
@Tom Hunt: The OED defines chauvinism as "bellicose patriotism". Back to school you go.
Reply
Gravatar Malcolm Rasala 02 January 2012
@Tom Hunt: My Dear Tom: You are playing with words. You fool no one. Patriotism is Chauvinism / National Chauvinism is Patriotism. Read British history. Are you saying all the wars we fought were not motivated by patriotism. If you are you are spouting delusional nonsense. Ask say the average Indian in India if they feel British patriotism as practicised by British imperialism was not chauvinistic. It still is. You and you like still think you are superior to say the French or the Germans. Your Daily Mail and Daily Telegragh oozes chauvinism. Show us where chauvinism exists without patriotism. As Dr Johnson would have said "you are a scoundrel" to pretend otherwise.

Secondly: I am not a Christian. But according to the Bible - which you, I assume, (correct me if I am wrong) profess to follow "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male or female, for you are all One in Christ Jesus"
Because Poland is what you call devout (arguable if the latest statistics are anything to go by) means nothing if they like you do not practice what they preach. This is the history of christianity down the ages; christians professing one thing and doing the very opposite. Hypocrites as your Christ would have called you.
Finally, you may be right about "typical left-liberal hysteria". But the agenda is set by the left. Britain did not vote for the right. It now never does and is unlikely in the near future to do so. The majority are anti-right (just add up the Labour and Lib -Dem votes). Moreover, just because some antedeluvian think-tank wonks conjure up nonsenses like patriotism does not mean that the vast majority of Britons will follow such a silly childish unintelligent agenda. You underestimate your fellow man Come join the 21st century
Reply
Gravatar Mark Macho 26 December 2011
Doing good where one lives is good. But in a world where everyone wants to trade with everyone else, where people are delighted to study abroad, where even the most patriotic are happy to holiday abroad, where many of us live and retire abroad patriotism is not enough for a good life.

With centuries of mercantile and even colonial energy
coupled with at least some conscience that people have a right to rule themselves Britain has helped to bring about the world we have.

Now Britain finds itself queasy in a world where blowing up third world countries and inserting itself into their infrastructure no
longer really works. It creates danger at home and spends treasure
rather than amasses it. It used to do the reverse!

A real appraisal of Britain"s declining status in the world demands
some fancy footwork thinking that an admiring glance to the past will not supply. Elizabeth I and Walter Raleigh, were they alive would be the first to tell you so. The internet has given us a different world. It is maybe for the first time a World and not just an assembly of countries. And a Briton invented it. Now we have to inhabit it. Prevailing ,if that"s what we want, where the whole
world is our customer and constituency is a very different game.

Warm and fuzzy wooley patiotism is not enough to cut the mustard.
We can stay at home and count our blessings or we can get busy
in whole new ways. Anything less will deny our duties and aspirations for ourselves and others. This is the 21st century.

www.10muses.com
Reply
Gravatar Mark Macho 26 December 2011
Dear Tom

Doing good where one lives is good. But in a world where everyone wants to trade with everyone else, where people are delighted to study abroad, where even the most patriotic are happy to holiday abroad, where many of us live and retire abroad patriotism is not enough for a good life.

With centuries of mercantile and even colonial energy
coupled with at least some conscience that people have a right to rule themselves Britain has helped to bring about the world we have.

Now Britain finds itself queasy in a world where blowing up third world countries and inserting itself into their infrastructure no
longer really works. It creates danger at home and spends treasure
rather than amasses it. It used to do the reverse!

A real appraisal of Britain"s declining status in the world demands
some fancy footwork thinking that an admiring glance to the past will not supply. Elizabeth I and Walter Raleigh, were they alive would be the first to tell you so. The internet has given us a different world. It is maybe for the first time a World and not just an assembly of countries. And a Briton invented it. Now we have to inhabit it. Prevailing ,if that"s what we want, where the whole
world is our customer and constituency is a very different game.

Warm and fuzzy wooley patiotism is not enough to cut the mustard.
We can stay at home and count our blessings or we can get busy
in whole new ways. Anything less will deny our duties and aspirations for ourselves and others. This is the 21st century.






www.1omuses.com
Reply
Gravatar confused.com 26 December 2011
A Tory Minister goes to a Nazi themed party and toasts Hitler (who killed hundreds of thousands of Brits). Mr Hunt above calls for patriotism. What exactly does the modern Conservative Party stand for? Nazism on one side. British patriotism onthe other. Confused.com?
Reply
Gravatar Soullah Tahtah 26 December 2011
Britain we are told is about to fall behind Brazil in the economic league table falling thanks to Mr Hunts Conservative philosophy from number 4 in the world to number 9. His response; patriotism!!!! What a modern mind-set he exists in.
Reply
Gravatar Ian Derby 26 December 2011
I thought we Conservatives are against social engineering? The above sounds a bit Marxist to me.
Reply
Gravatar Malcolm Rasala 25 December 2011
The deep hypocrisy and profound ignorance at the heart of Tom Hunt"s thinking above who doubtless like his mentor Philip Blond calls himself a Christian: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus’ The Letter of Paul to the Galatians 3-28

We are told Tom studied Russian Studies at Oxford. Well as Leo Tolstoy put it in his ‘The Gospel in Brief’ ...The fifth commandment: Do not make distinctions between your homeland and that of others, because all people are the children of one father.......In the previous law it was said: do good to your own people and do harm to the foreigner. But I say to you: love not only your own countrymen but also the people of other nations.....you must praise them and do good to them. If you are only good to your own countrymen then you are like everyone else who is good to their own countrymen ; and it is because of this that wars occur. But you should treat all nations equally........For the father of all people there is no such thing as different nations, there are no different kingdoms either: all are brothers, all are sons of one father. Don’t create differences between people based on nations and kingdoms”

Of course if Tom Hunt above and Philip Blond are not professing Christians then the above has no meaning. But if they are professing Christians as they pretend they are then what gargantuan hypocrisy they utter. Charlatans and Pharisees. Total Mountebanks.

www.paultothegalations.com
Reply
Gravatar Tom Hunt 30 December 2011
@Malcolm Rasala : I really think its nonsense to suggest that being proud in one"s country immediately leads to one believing their own country is superior to others. I think the key distinction here is not between patriotism and nationalism, but between Nationalism (inclusive)/patriotism and chauvinism.

re your point concerning Christianity being incompatible with patriotism, again, I don"t think this view cuts any mustard. Poland is an example of a country which is deeply patriotic whilst being one of the most devout countries in Europe, arguably the most. In fact, many Poles have come to understand their sense of national identity through their religion. And it was that very identity that facilitated the development of Solidarity, a force critical in undermining the foundations of the last great nation denying force (the USSR). Solidarity could have only happened in Poland, and the key reason for this was the development of a shared purpose and identity that transcended potential class based divisions. Much of this purpose and identity, along with the associated civic resilience, came from a concoction of both national and religious sentiment.... Its an imperative that when discussing the role that patriotism can play in the twenty first century we move beyond the typical left-liberal hysteria that has dominated our discussions for too long.
Reply
Gravatar Tom Hunt 30 December 2011
@Malcolm Rasala : I really think its nonsense to suggest that being proud in one"s country immediately leads to one believing their own country is superior to others. I think the key distinction here is not between patriotism and nationalism, but between Nationalism (inclusive)/patriotism and chauvinism.

re your point concerning Christianity being incompatible with patriotism, again, I don"t think this view cuts any mustard. Poland is an example of a country which is deeply patriotic whilst being one of the most devout countries in Europe, arguably the most. In fact, many Poles have come to understand their sense of national identity through their religion. And it was that very identity that facilitated the development of Solidarity, a force critical in undermining the foundations of the last great nation denying force (the USSR). Solidarity could have only happened in Poland, and the key reason for this was the development of a shared purpose and identity that transcended potential class based divisions. Much of this purpose and identity, along with the associated civic resilience, came from a concoction of both national and religious sentiment.... Its an imperative that when discussing the role that patriotism can play in the twenty first century we move beyond the typical left-liberal hysteria that has dominated our discussions for too long.
Reply
Gravatar Diogenes 24 December 2011
Surely the "key cause" of the London riots was the murder of an unarmed (repeat unarmed as the PCC has reported) young man by the police? Funny how some so evidently wish to ignore this FACT.
Reply
Gravatar Reality 24 December 2011
Did not the Conservatives achieve less than 40% of the vote at the last election. If this is correct does it not mean 6 out of every 10 do not like Conservatism and it could be argued dislike silly juvenile concepts like patriotism and of course the delusional nonsense of the Big Society (in practice the Small Society) ?

Patriotism in one form or another led to 50 million people being killed in war in the last century. Patriotism is nationalism in another guise. It is an evil idea that has led to untold misery and suffering.

Clearly some people like young Tom Hunt here never studied history or if he did sadly he has learnt nothing. Heaven help us from such delusional thinking. He patently belongs to a bye-gone age. Very sad for one so young. And utterly irrelevant to the majority of intelligent people in 21st century Britain.
Reply
Gravatar Dr Johnson 24 December 2011
"Patriotism: the last refuge of the scoundrel"
Reply
Gravatar Matthew Lakin 22 December 2011
Good stuff. I do think the relationship between the Big Society and High Tory patriotism, which I think you implicitly endorse, is more problematic than you give credence to. The Big Society, as I understand, is centrally concerned with generating and implementing autonomy, choice, freedom, self-mastery and and purpose. However, isn"t not the Big Society, for the Cameron Coalition Government, the mere flip-side of the fiscal retrenchments of the Osborne Treasury? So, is the Big Society the obverse of small-state Osbornomics or are they parallel agenda which never shall meet? Rightly or wrongly, the overwhelming perception seems to couple the well-intentioned and ideologically-consistent aims and objectives of the Big Society with the austerity plans/proposals of the Coalition.

There is certainly patriotic glimpses in the Tory expression of the Big Society. The belief in government, personal and social responsibility is perhaps a belief in the ability of individuals, families and communities to run and devise things in a more socially-harmonious, which gives rise to patriotic attachments. However, isn"t much of this undermined by cold-calculated arithmetic? Patriotism with strings attached? Is the Big Society"s potential for unleashing authentic patriotism only compatible when the economy is in a more benign setting? Much of Cameron"s "social responsibility", "post-bureuacratic age" "Big Society" ideology was pre-financial crisis 2008. It is noteworthy that the Big Society was coined in 2009 and regularly used when the economy was perceived to be the primary concern of statecraft. So whilst I think there is genuine and real feeling for the Big Society and you"re right in thinking that there is mutual benefit in attaching it to patriotism, I think the objective is undermined by the expansionary fiscal contraction of the Treasury.

Also, is there such a degree of difference (perceived or misperceived) between Thatcherite conceptions and Cameronite conceptions of patriotism? The libertarian, swash-buckling, "Big Bang" facade of Thatcherism was only one projection of Thatcherism. The other "civic", moral-crusading side of Thatcherism is much more consonant with the patriotic potential of the Big Society. Hence, I think there is a lot of ideological unity in the Big Society, insofar as the Cameronites could invest into it a dual small-statism with a desire for the recrudescence of Victorian self-help, and the Thatcherites could read into it an anti-statism in economic affairs and a belief in pre-progressive, dawn of the modern state moralism. The object of the small state and the revival of pre-progressive morality is in many ways the economic measures being made by the Treasury. Hence, the Big Society, whilst festooned with other considerations, is essentially tied to the economism of Cameronite ideology whilst wanting for it to remain separate. Can the economic policies of the Cameron Coalition sufficiently deliver the patriotic potential of the Big Society when one half of the objective is for a smaller state in the role, delivery and scope of public service provision, etc? Is a smaller state a patriotic vision? Do we care more for our mediating institutions or the delivery of benefits and credits to our poorest? Just some thoughts. Interesting nevertheless Tom!
Reply
Gravatar Philip B 26 December 2011
@Matthew Lakin: Interesting Matthew to see you are mystified by the term Big Society as much they rest of us. What does it mean? Does anyone know. Or care?
Reply

Join the discussion Have opinions on this matter? Why not get involved and comment on this below.

Become a Member Joining ResPublica give you an exclusive amount of features. Gain early access to ResPublica events, contribute to topics and much more.

Detailed Summary

Date Published
22 December 2011

Issue(s)
British Civic Life

About The Authors

Tom Hunt

Tom is a former research assistant at ResPublica, working within the 'Models and Partnerships' workstream. He is a gradu...