Human Rights and British Values
Britain must walk the tightrope of patriotism and nationalism over the next two years
Moral relativism is not a subject that grips many politicians, let alone voters. But whether rhetorically or literally it is was integral to the Brexit vote, and will be to the negotiations. Whether you believe values are individual or universal is central to how you view the world.
There is a fine line between patriotism and nationalism. Patriotism is pride for your country and its actions. But nationalism takes that further, the belief that your country is superior and is better suited to doing things its own way. It’s the line between the Human Rights Act, and a British Bill of Rights. Nationalism tells the world that your values are different to theirs.
Whilst poll after poll puts immigration as key to the vote to leave the EU, that nationalistic phrase “Take Back Control” rings true for those who believe Britain is best. The belief that Britain is better off alone, forging it’s own path.
Britain has always been UK centric. We are the centre of the map. Our newspapers are the only ones worth reading. Our concerns are all that matter in the Brexit negotiations. There are several layers to the irony that Britain has Napoleon complex, far besides the fact the man was taller than average for his time.
As Frans Timmermans recently put it; Europe has two kind of countries, those that are small and those that are yet to realise they are small. The UK could not be more of the former. An average population, an average economy but a big history that skews modern thinking. Guy Verhofstadt maybe right (see his speech below). Not experiencing war on British shores, consistent and clear borders, no dictators, or the incompatibility of common and napoleonic law always destined Britain to be different. Britain, unlike other nations, speaks of its Empire without acknowledging its crimes — the belief that Britain’s way is correct and infallible is deeply held.
The problem with this is that it rules out a shared value system. There are no universal values, but British values. It implies equality, the right to expression, or right to life vary from place to place. It is something that unites the left and the right. It leaves Britain not intervening in genocide in Iraq or the Balkans. It brings politics down to identity not to humanity.
But this is what Europe was for. To bring together nations to achieve more through a shared values. This is the distinction between patriotism and nationalism. Patriotism allows for this, to be proud of liberal British or Dutch values, and influencing European decisions to reflect them. It means recognising German concerns over data protection, and their history with the Stasi, or acknowledging French reluctance to use GM crops — but cooperating to make judgements that benefit all.
Balancing patriotism and cooperation is why the EU uses devolved competencies, allowing decisions to be made where are most suited. It allows the UK to be a leader in genome technology, whilst conservative nations reflect religious influence. But it doesn’t impede scientists from across Europe working together and sharing expertise to develop fields and deliver progress.
Its why EU defence cooperation has always been so toxic to the UK. A nation that doesn’t understand others unwillingness to have large military forces, but their desire to share technologies, production and purchasing. Rather than buy 29 different types of tanks, buy one in bulk. This improves efficiency and empowers NATO without having to spend more. But Britain’s (justified) pride in its army has always been a barrier to this.
This nationalistic lack of desire to understand Europe, or to share values, but to concentrate on the UK is one that will seriously harm Britain ahead of negotiations. How many people in Britain pick up El Pais, Le Monde, Die Welt? How many people in Britain even know enough to order a beer in those countries? The thought of negotiations being conducted in French- pure anathema.
Understanding what drives individual nations, but also that the values the EU-27 share will be crucial to the UK’s future relationship. It needs Britain to step back and self-reflect. Does a nation of Britain’s size have the power, the sway or the cards to sign beneficial trade deals, possibly. Can Britain set up science funding that competes with or goes beyond EU funding, possibly? But do discussing either encourage the EU to be open to Britain, no? Why would it — ‘go on then Britain see how you get on’.
Britain needs to understand quickly that its values are the world’s values, and the EU will do their upmost to uphold that. It establishes a middle ground for negotiations and shows a nation open to cooperation. Strutting across the globe with nationalist hubris, claiming Britain’s best, and Britain’s best alone, will leave us just that. Morally, economically, but proudly isolated.
