Of interest but I wonder whether any invocation of 'values' reflects a kind of Platonist world view. Unlike Platonists, I don't believe in the existence of values in any objective, 'out there' sense, indepedently of people's empirical lives. I would prefer to say that 'values', if you have to use those words, are instantiated in ways of life. (I am trying very hard to avoid mentioning the philosopher who championed that concept...) So, one used to speak of an 'Anglo-Saxon' way of life and that, when it existed, would have expressed or manifested those values. Italian friend of mine who has lived here for 55 years told me that when interviewed for his first job and asked why he had come to England, he had replied: 'Because I like the Anglo-Saxon way of life'. Pretty archaic, alas... Another way of conveying what I mean is by quoting a Ian Fleming novel in which Bond speaks of meeting someone with 'pleasant, quintessential English face'. The bearer of that face, I feel, would have embody the English way life. Finally, the reason why society is fractured today, in my opinion, largely resides in the system called globalisation. That includes mass migration but also much, much else.
Thought provoking read. To me, as a politically homeless "new centrist / realistic progressive / liberal conservative" (call it what you will) from a left leaning background but with a primary focus on liberalism (with a small "l" and as politically defined and understood), there are 3 distinct British values that should be seen as specific and strongly defended as core to our secular, liberal democracy (with it's Christian cultural tradition). (1) Freedom of speech - not the reflex political platitude but a societal culture where difficult collective conversations can be raised and take place openly with strength of argument as the deciding factor. We currently struggle with this despite it being "a fundamental British value". (2) Live and let live without coercion or control. Again we have the theory but the practice, both individually and collectively? In terms, of misogyny and violence towards women and girls, for example, we're going backwards in some regards, and in terms of collectively, we have increasing signs of sectarianism. (3) Rule of law. We only have to look across the pond to see what undermining the Rule of Law looks like. And there are plenty of cheerleaders here, combined with our own increasingly partisan, hostile, and social media driven politics. These should all be seen as fundamental values, not just in theory and platitudes, but through strong implementation and protection.
The Canadian Conservative government under Stephen Harper tried the same thing circa 2010, and the results were about as exciting as in Britain. In practice it amounted to a couple of pages in the citizenship booklet and some public griping about barbaric cultural values. And they did nothing to tamp down on immigration, of course.
Two major problems with this approach: 1. It doesn’t convince any immigrants of anything or have any genuine impact. 2. It can be weaponized by proponents of mass immigration to accuse anyone who wants to restrict immigration of not demonstrating Canadian (or British) values.
Starmer and Bliar have no British values as recognised by decent, sentient, indigenous or properly integrated Britons.
1000 years of nationhood, built by we, the people.
Of interest but I wonder whether any invocation of 'values' reflects a kind of Platonist world view. Unlike Platonists, I don't believe in the existence of values in any objective, 'out there' sense, indepedently of people's empirical lives. I would prefer to say that 'values', if you have to use those words, are instantiated in ways of life. (I am trying very hard to avoid mentioning the philosopher who championed that concept...) So, one used to speak of an 'Anglo-Saxon' way of life and that, when it existed, would have expressed or manifested those values. Italian friend of mine who has lived here for 55 years told me that when interviewed for his first job and asked why he had come to England, he had replied: 'Because I like the Anglo-Saxon way of life'. Pretty archaic, alas... Another way of conveying what I mean is by quoting a Ian Fleming novel in which Bond speaks of meeting someone with 'pleasant, quintessential English face'. The bearer of that face, I feel, would have embody the English way life. Finally, the reason why society is fractured today, in my opinion, largely resides in the system called globalisation. That includes mass migration but also much, much else.
Thought provoking read. To me, as a politically homeless "new centrist / realistic progressive / liberal conservative" (call it what you will) from a left leaning background but with a primary focus on liberalism (with a small "l" and as politically defined and understood), there are 3 distinct British values that should be seen as specific and strongly defended as core to our secular, liberal democracy (with it's Christian cultural tradition). (1) Freedom of speech - not the reflex political platitude but a societal culture where difficult collective conversations can be raised and take place openly with strength of argument as the deciding factor. We currently struggle with this despite it being "a fundamental British value". (2) Live and let live without coercion or control. Again we have the theory but the practice, both individually and collectively? In terms, of misogyny and violence towards women and girls, for example, we're going backwards in some regards, and in terms of collectively, we have increasing signs of sectarianism. (3) Rule of law. We only have to look across the pond to see what undermining the Rule of Law looks like. And there are plenty of cheerleaders here, combined with our own increasingly partisan, hostile, and social media driven politics. These should all be seen as fundamental values, not just in theory and platitudes, but through strong implementation and protection.
The Canadian Conservative government under Stephen Harper tried the same thing circa 2010, and the results were about as exciting as in Britain. In practice it amounted to a couple of pages in the citizenship booklet and some public griping about barbaric cultural values. And they did nothing to tamp down on immigration, of course.
Two major problems with this approach: 1. It doesn’t convince any immigrants of anything or have any genuine impact. 2. It can be weaponized by proponents of mass immigration to accuse anyone who wants to restrict immigration of not demonstrating Canadian (or British) values.