To: letters@guardian.co.uk
Re: History is at the heart of national and individual identity

Date: Friday 28 January 05

I'm still working on this letter (essay)

Dear Sir/Madam,
 
History lies at the heart of both national and individual identity. It needs to be not just taught, but also cultivated, and not just at school, but throughout life. Many of society's ills, I am sure, can be explained by deficiencies in its members sense of identity and belonging. No one abuses a community (through crime or anti-social behaviour) they belong and relate to, and have a healthy sense of identity with. 

Why? Not least, because an individual depends on his or her community no less than a child depends on its parents. To bite the hand that feeds you is not a sensible thing to do. Parents will tolerate a good deal of misbehaviour from their child, because they "love " it and hope that as it gets older it will learn to appreciate that love and return it. One day they may well become as dependent on their child as it is on them now.

But wait a minute . . . The community I'm referring to is the kind of community that existed before the advent of civilisation and the invention of money. It is the kind of community that evolution equipped us to live in. There has been no time for our behavioural programming to adapt to urban society, so it is no wonder that it is, and always has been, such a mess. 

Civilisation brought with it powerful rulers, aristocracies and priesthoods, the power of whom was greatly enhanced and facilitated by the invention of money.

Aristocracies were established and maintained by force of arms - strong men taking advantage of weaker men. Once established the aristocracy was given legitimacy by the priesthood, with which it formed a mutually beneficial alliance, one providing the brawn the other the brains. Together they took advantage of the mass of the people. On the positive side, this alliance facilitated the development and expression of human creativity in all its forms, and what we refer to as civilisation. But it has always been a society deeply rooted in man's animal nature, and was never fair, just or humane.

The rule of law was established (in England) by the aristocracy in its struggle with an absolute monarch. Over many generations it was extended to include finally all members of society.

Our original dependency on the local community (or family group) has been replaced by a dependency on society at large (in the modern world, the nation state). However, awareness of this dependency is obscured by the role of money. Money appears to make those who have enough of it "independent", even though they are not, of course, but merely have the means of buying whatever they need or want.

Thus, mass society and the role of money have undermined our natural morals and social behaviour.

The nation state has taken the place of both the family group, which supports us in return for our loyalty and cooperation, and the natural environment, now replaced by the socio-economic environment, in which we ruthlessly struggle (mostly but not always within the law) for survival and advantage. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

As a native, fair-skinned Briton and European, when I look back at British history and prehistory I can readily identify with it in the knowledge that I am closely related to and visibly indistinguishable from those who participated in and shaped it: whether ancient (stone age) Briton, Celt, Roman, German, Scandinavian or Norman invader, or some European immigrant. Whether I'm looking back at prehistoric hunter-gathers, Neolithic farmers, medieval peasants, clergy or aristocrats, or artists, natural philosophers, navigators, engineers, scientists, statesmen, generals, admirals, common soldiers, sailors, merchants, capitalists, workers etc. of the 16th - 20th centuries, these are all my potential ancestors, or are closely related to them. If my ancestors were not all ethnic Europeans (e.g. if I were of African, Asian, Chinese, Japanese origin, or whatever), I cannot imagine relating to or identifying with British and European history as I do. Unless I am an exception, this must surely have consequences for the way in which history is taught and cultivated among British pupils and citizens of different ethnic origin.

A Briton of African, West Indian, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh or whatever origin, surely, will relate to and identify with a different history than Britons of European origin. Hopefully they will also be interested in the history of their adopted country, but many are probably going to be more interested in the history of their own ancestors. This poses serious questions in respect to national identity in a multiracial and multicultural society.

At the personal level it not so much of a problem - at least, not in my experience. I do not chose my friends or acquaintances on the basis of race or culture, although they obviously play and important role. But at less personal levels of society they play a much more important role. I would be very reluctant to vote for a political representative of a different race or culture to myself, unless I knew them personally, which at national level is very unlikely. Although it is rarely mentioned, everyone knows that the chances of the next American president or vice president (or even the candidates) being an African American are zero, because the majority of European Americans would not consider voting for anyone not of their own race. And it is not just ethnic Europeans who tend to favour their own race - all races do, I'm sure. When black Americans were offered the choice between two white candidates at a mayoral election, electoral turnout was pitifully low (less than 20 percent, I believe). When, at another election, one of the candidates was black, the turn out of black voters was more than 80 percent, and there is no prize for guessing which candidate they voted into office. 

To be continued . . . .

 

Guardian, 28 Jan. "Tories want history lessons until at least 16"

Guardian Leader, 28 Jan. "No foreign country"

Daily Telegraph, 27 Jan. "What every pupil should know about Britain"

 

 
Roger Hicks