"And even the distinction between rich and poor dwindles somewhat when one regards the nation from the outside. There is no question about the inequality of wealth in England. It is grosser than in any European country, and you have only to look down the nearest street to see it. Economically, England is certainly two nations, if not three or four. But at the same time the vast majority of the people feel themselves to be a single nation and are conscious of resembling one another more than they resemble foreigners. Patriotism is usually stronger than class-hatred, and always stronger than any kind of internationalism. Except for a brief moment in 1920 (the ‘Hands off Russia’ movement) the British working class have never thought or acted internationally. For two and a half years they watched their comrades in Spain slowly strangled, and never aided them by even a single strike. But when their own country (the country of Lord Nuffield and Mr Montague Norman) was in danger, their attitude was very different. At the moment when it seemed likely that England might be invaded, Anthony Eden appealed over the radio for Local Defence Volunteers. He got a quarter of a million men in the first twenty-four hours, and another million in the subsequent month. One has only to compare these figures with, for instance, the number of conscientious objectors to see how vast is the strength of traditional loyalties compared with new ones."
George Orwell, England Your England (From The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius)
Well, sorry for the delay in writing a post on the back of the Jubilee bandwagon! I'm not really a monarchist. Apart from anything else I think it is cruel on individuals to have their whole lives mapped out for them through mere accident of birth. To have no choice but to carry out regnal duty and not being able to pursue a person's own innate talents, or preferred path in life is a shameful waste. However the legacy of the monarchy from a tribal perspective provides a focal point for nationhood. The royal line gives us a link (however tenuous!) to our collective past - a living embodiment of our heritage and history. Until some national upheaval that most probably we radical nationalists will ourselves have to create, I see little sense in disestablishing the House of Windsor. Monarchies create myths and myths nurture tribalism.
Of course, neutered constitutional monarchies have none of the kudos of our great Kings and Queens of the early medieval to early modern periods, the perceived warrior leaders from the pages of Our Island Story . These monarchies began as emergent social elites that evolved through that most natural of tribal phenomena - nepotism. There is nothing inherently wrong with nepotism - it is the socio-genetic means of ensuring folk lineage. Radical nationalists must accept nepotism as a natural urge. But we must nurture a moral nepotism through the checks and balances of the small folk communities we envisage. Nepotism must remain on a small sphere - the small trader, the small farm -bedrocks of the small community. Nepotism should be encouraged on a community level. Community owned resources passing on to the next generation of that community. In this way small communities strengthen, become more resilient and autonomous. As a National Anarchist I also advocate a sort of stateless corporatism where elites within communities emerge through their own merit - we need the best people for each job.
Marxists are pretty good at interpreting history. Within any nation's history there are internal conflicts and antagonisms which lead to changes. But they see things only in the material sense and the material alone does not humanity make. To radical nationalists today, the great revolts of the past intertwine with the great establishments into one national myth. Both high and low, our ancestors speak to us with one voice to create our identities today. In England we had two very English revolts in 1381 and 1536 - their gripe was not with the King but with officialdom (of course there is the exception to the rule - 1649 anyone? However this was one new elite challenging another and after Ollie we got his son, Dick - a royal line in all but name?) Our tribal instincts outweigh class conflict time and time again. Our historic rebels are interpreted as national heroes, not class warriors. The Sex Pistols are now national icons alongside Elizabeth!
The global macro-capitalist system is rotten to the core, I know. But should the workers of the 'developed' world really be asking for more? Hmmm....I don't know. We need to cut consumerism and lead simpler lives - rely more on the spiritual and less on the material. Generally speaking the people of the first world have comparatively enough creature comforts. Have genuine class grievances of the past been eclipsed by ideologically driven Left-led skirmishes which, when you take a step back, have no real moral basis? Radical nationalists need to encourage the fostering of the real struggle of the age: the national struggle against the global elite. National Anarchists of course say the best way of going about this is to secede from mass society, by forming our own counter-cultures, economies and communities. It's our ball and we're not playing!