I disagree with this take. For one, MPs already swear the normal oath of allegiance to the King at the start of each Parliament, Government ministers take the Privy Council oath, which is far more detailed. Civil servants even have a separate oath IIRC. In the modern day and age, these are just words that the people we dislike just see as archaic traditions that they have to go along with to obtain power. They don’t have a metaphysical belief or grounding that the words that they say in a solemn oath ought to be true and bear weight upon their soul, or even their honour as a man or woman of Britain.
The one thing that I think that America does get right is that they have this concept of a natural-born American. Someone born in the US or to American parents, who presumably grows up steeped in American culture and and is the inheritor of American traditions.
I think that this is something that Habib fits into. His mother was British, he moved to Britain when he was 14, and he very clearly identifies as British in a way that many do not.
This is a challenging point to make, because of the number of “Brits” who have no Anglo-Saxon DNA, and to be clear, I don’t think just because you are given citizenship, it doesn’t mean that your child is now automatically a Brit. Part of it is having an ancient ancestral connection to the land.
I’m not interested in purity testing, but I think coming up with a definition of what a natural born British person is, and restricting based on that would work.
Well the US would struggle with some kind of racial purity test for loyalty, that’s for sure, and in any community, the ‘zeal of the converted’ can mean that an incomer can be far more loyal than another person with ‘pure’ DNA.
I agree - citizenship doesn’t make you anything other than ‘a citizen’ but even growing up in a country, steeped in its culture, doesn’t necessarily make you want to promote your country’s interests - look at our crop of globalists running the country.
I accept that oaths are largely symbolic but it is possible to ensure that there are legal consequences to betraying the oath. I think we should re-invigorate the concept of treason! (I know we still technically have a law, but it has fallen into disuse)
As for swearing allegiance to the KIng?! Ha! The arch-globalist who looks like he is a Christian apostate who has converted to Islam.
The point about oaths is that breaches should be followed up and punished.
It isn’t about loyalty. It is about being part of a group, identifying with that group, and that group identifying with you. You are correct, the politicians don’t identify with the average British person and view the common man with contempt. But unless we want some sort of ideological purity test, I don’t think that we can solve this.
Who interprets these acts? Lawyers and judges? Or politicians? Ignoring the problem that is Charles, these are political problems. I don’t think that they are solvable by courts interpreting law.
The British Parliament has impeachment and attainder powers which it could use to this effect, but that worries me. Say in 2029 we win, pass “The Great Attainder Act 2029”, declaring that as a matter of law, every minister of the last Labour Government has committed treason. What happens the day after we get ousted? Does that look pretty for anyone?
Don’t get me wrong, I think that a massive clear out of the Civil Service would do us good. Firing most of the police higher-ups and having a bonfire of government departments and the various quangos would only help. But to the people who came before, I think that you have to be magnanimous in victory and much like Caesar, pardon your enemies once the war is won. Again, you can then lay low those who persist in their war against you, but in order to maintain moral legitimacy if nothing else, these have to be relatively ad hoc procedures.
I find the “if not one of your parents…” troubling because if my English grandmother birthed my father on a trip abroad I would not be able to be involved in politics.
Japan refuses dual citizenship. Maybe once the prisons are cleared of dual citizenship criminals the UK could follow suit? That would sort the patriots from the nonpatriots.
No, the quality of judges, like much else in public life, is extremely low. I always say that the solution to most problems is ‘scale’ and that small is beautiful. Our system of governance is too top heavy and that magnifies all the inevitable human problems of loyalty, power etc. Nothing in nature ever gets so big that it becomes a danger to itself - only human constructs do that. A bee hive will split into two once it reaches a certain mass. Growth in nature, if exponential, is pathogenic.
Answer? Copy nature - small, linked centres of governance in a federal structure with power dispersed and subsidiarity in decision making. End politics as a career - maximum terms - unpaid (community service!) - audited budgets.
Very good point. All of this should be led by a long term plan for UK, where the services (medical, water supply, electricity supply, housing supply) are planned for a population number that this island and Northern Ireland can sustain in a way that provides citizens with a safe, integrated environment where we are proud to be, with the aim of ever increasing quality of life with respect for the law.
I don’t think it should be so much Nationality but Citizenship and evidence of patriotism of some form. If you decide to come here and work your backside off and make something of yourself, contribute to the economy and share the British values I don’t think that should exclude you from Government positions. Similarly to someone else here on this, your permanent residence should be the UK. I also feel some people from elsewhere have better intentions for the country than some people from here. By their fruits we shall know them.
The alternative is suggesting ethnic displacement of a native population is preferable to avoid hurting feelings, There’s nothing saying at some point you couldn’t but having no ethnic tie while expecting representation is part of the problem. this is an American ideal not a European one and is fundamentally the reason we find ourselves in the position we’re in.
There’s no point saying its based on shared values because ethnic integrity is one of the shared values underpinning the entirety of the disaffected right.
Joint nationals should not be in government give up the second passport if you want to govern in the UK.
Look at the people who make regular visits to their “home” country or are sending money home on a regular basis, they are not british
