Out of clichés
David Edgerton, 60, is a leading British historian with many studies tending to question what he calls the 'clichés of history'. His field of specialization is the history of technology and science. But he knows how to go much further, because talking about technology today means talking about everything.
Criticizing mainstream thinking on these issues is one of the salient features of his studies, among which we mention: Science, Technology and the British Industrial 'Decline' 1870–1970 (1996); The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History since 1900 (2006), Warfare State: Britain 1920–1970 (2005), Britain's War Machine: Weapons, Resources and Experts in the Second World War (2011) and The Rise and Fall of the British Nation: A Twentieth-Century History (2018).
As the evolution of his works shows, the English historian, starting from economic and machine history, broadened his spectrum of investigation to include the political history of Great Britain, without losing that critical approach to the prevailing clichés. He is undoubtedly one of the most interesting and independent voices to hear about one of the major UFOs that furrow the thoughts of Europeans, Brexit. Just as the fall of the Berlin Wall had greater consequences for the world than for Germany, so Brexit risks having more significant repercussions for the United Kingdom than for the rest of the world. And this is certainly not a cliché. Edgerton's theses deserve careful consideration.
Brexit, tough lex sed lex
The UK may finally come to an end. The exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union is now law. It happened after Brexit smiled on the Conservative Party and its leader, Boris Johnson, an unexpected electoral success that hadn't been seen since Thatcher's time. For decades, membership of the European Union has held the United Kingdom together. Now, however, impressive cracks are emerging that announce a possible drift of its territories. Brexit is tearing apart the unity of the Kingdom. Even the historical fantasy, quite recent, of the "British nation" begins to move towards the boulevard of sunset.
Northern Ireland
La Boris Johnson's Brexit it will probably lead to the establishment, for the first time in modern history, of a border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. The plan was designed to allow Britain to break radically with Europe. This will ensure that Northern Ireland remains aligned with the rest of the European bloc, including the neighboring Republic of Ireland. This is a shocking betrayal by Ulster Unionists, whose politics are based on the sanctity and inseparability of the United Kingdom. Furthermore, including Northern Ireland in the same regulatory system as its southern neighbor presents a major opportunity for Irish nationalists. The desire of the latter for a united country becomes a goal that begins to take shape.
Scotland
Boris Johnson's Brexit has certainly not gone unnoticed in Scotland. The pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP) won 48 of the 59 seats up for grabs in Scotland in December's election. A large majority of Scots voted to remain in the European Union in the 2016 referendum. Allowing Northern Ireland, but not Scotland, to stay aligned with the European Union market will only add to the pressure even more Scottish for Independence. Nicola Sturgeon, the leader of the SNP, has already formally requested that the Scottish Parliament be given the power to hold a referendum on independence. Johnson, for his part, made it clear that he intends to block this vote, but may not be able to block it forever. So perhaps we are at the end. It won't just happen right away, but it could happen by the end of the decade. Scotland gone, Northern Ireland gone, England and Wales remain, a mini union, which itself could split under pressure from Welsh nationalists.
Face to face with problems
Would this outlet really be that bad? Actually, no. Breaking up the Union will certainly not be an easy process, but it could be one of the few good things to come from Brexit — not just for Scotland and Ireland, but also, and especially, for England. Having been freed from the unionist grip, Northern Ireland could join the thriving Irish economy and become part of a more socially liberal reality. How things have changed in the meantime! For Irish nationalists this step will represent a long-desired reunion. While union with Ireland is what unionists fear most, they may now be able to reconcile with their Irishness after being betrayed by London. Scotland could take their own future into their own hands. It has a higher death rate than England, and while it has less inequality than its southern neighbour, the gap between the two countries has narrowed sharply over the past two decades. The Scots, for their part, have not yet addressed these problems, shifting the blame to London. Independence will deprive them of this alibi and force them to face the headaches of their society. An independent Scotland will have to find its own political identity rather than identify with contrasts with London.
Happy England
And England would also benefit from the disappearance of the United Kingdom. Despite being the dominant nation, Brexit won't do it any good. England does not yet have a national identity. It is torn between the bustling, young and pro-European big cities - especially London - and the rest of the country, aged, stagnant and anti-European. Freed from the grip of the decadent idea of a British nation and British state, England could finally shake off its delusions of grandeur. The current fanciful legends about the importance of the country in the world will be shattered. England will slip to eighth place among the world's largest economies. And, probably, it will have to give up its nuclear weapons. The UK's nuclear submarine base is located in Scotland.
England need not be, as many fear, the crippled, and perhaps even irredentist, heir to the United Kingdom. Less bold and more aware of her real place in the world, she could, shortly, rethink her hostility towards the European Union. Scotland has undergone a process of deindustrialisation similar to that of northern England and Wales, but has voted to "remain". As Anthony Barnett and many other writers suggest, a more progressive English nation, on the Scottish model, could emerge. This England could have a normal democratic nationalism, quiet in its aspirations and inclusive of those of others.
The glue of the Empire
The idea of breaking the union is not as outrageous as it might seem. The UK is neither ancient nor stable. Before 1945, Irish, Welsh, Scottish and English "national identity" were not entrenched variants of Britishness, but part of something much larger: imperial identity. British propaganda during the Second World War claimed that the United Kingdom was only the ruling state of a Commonwealth of British nations. Rather, together with India and the colonies, it was an equal component of the British Empire. It was the Empire that fought the war, not the UK. Soldiers died for king and country — but that country had no name. No one gave their lives for the UK.
The United Kingdom from 1945 to 1970
After 1945, Britain — a national United Kingdom — was one of the many post-imperial constructs that emerged from the ashes of Empire. From then until the XNUMXs, the United Kingdom existed as a coherent economic, political and ideological unit distinct from the rest of the world. There was a British national economy, a British national army and a British national politics dominated by two national parties who believed in this union. It was the brief period of the British nation. Actually, the only one. This national United Kingdom has been broken up economically since the XNUMXs by the closely interconnected processes of globalization and economic integration with Europe.
A policy with a rear view mirror
This decadent British nationalism is a holdover from the 2016s. Now it is disrupting the union, more so than the Scottish, Irish and Welsh versions of this nationalism. Strong in England but weak elsewhere, with the exception of a handful of hard-core unionists in Northern Ireland, British nationalism has manifested itself in calls for Brexit, from before the XNUMX referendum until today. Brexitari mistakenly believe that independence from the European Union will make the UK great again. But Brexit and the disappointments for the greatness of the United Kingdom that will accompany it are the politics of the nostalgic, that is, of those who remember that brief united and national experience. The young people of England, like those of the rest of Britain, have overwhelmingly supported their desire to remain in the European Union. They also understand that there is a need to break free from the practices of Westminster and Whitehall, not Brussels, and the self-defeating rage of the elderly. Just a few decades ago, a new United Kingdom emerged from the Empire. Now, with the breakup of the union, it becomes not only possible, but desirable - drawing nourishment from British nationalism - the emergence of a new England from the United Kingdom.
