The British Nation: How did political change shape ideas of nationhood in the 19th and 20th centuries?
- Owen Whines
- Jul 11, 2024
- 9 min read
Hans Kohn explains the idea of nationhood rose to prominence in the seventeenth century, with the growth of political thought and participation.[1] This idea is described as a greater sense of loyalty to the nation, one which was governed over by political parties, in Great Britain being the Liberals, the Conservatives and the Labour Party. The focus will start at the period of imperialism and sovereignty under the Liberals and early Conservatives, considerably furthering the foundations of British national identity. This viewpoint will then change towards a focus on national security and an increase in globalisation, significantly due to the Second World War and the introduction of left-wing political ideas, reducing the ability to create a sense of nationhood within the nation.
The Liberal Party, formerly known as the Whigs, invoked a large sense of nationhood in the 19th century, as they played a large part in the rise of the British Empire. Krishan Kumar suggests it was in the nineteenth century when nationalism rose to dominance politically.[2] Kumar further states that nineteenth-century imperialism can then appear as an extension, of nationalism; by the same token the nation can come to conceive itself in the image of empire, in essence being the ‘supreme expression of great power status’. There are two main reasons for this embrace: propaganda within the empire and racial ideology. J.M. MacKenzie expresses the importance of the government to win the support of the literate voting class, who had recently gained the vote.[3] In the 1880s, this support was gained by a “manipulation of British public opinion”. This manipulation could be found in nationalistic themes in newspapers, speeches, postcards and posters, resulting in continued backing of pro-empire parties, those who supported nationalism over this period.[4] In addition, some attitudes of the British public were influenced by racial prejudices. The English writer and poet Rudyard Kipling authored it was the 'White Man's burden' to rule over the 'sullen peoples' of the world, the idea it was the British purpose to rule over the less developed countries and their inhabitants.[5] As a prominent figure, Kipling reflected the common view of the literate during this period. Due to this, increased feelings of nationalism developed, culminating in an ideology of superiority due to race, as a byproduct of nationhood. Unlike the white colonies, it wasn’t until the mid-1900s the black African colonies began to decolonise which Harold Macmillan noted as the “winds of change”. [6] Public opinion would incite the government to act on the decision and combined with the literate male comprising the majority of the vote and a common view of British superiority as presented by Kipling, this shows the majority would have been in favour of the continued colonisation of Africa in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
On the other hand, the 1807 Abolition of the Slave Trade Act gives reason that the sense of nationhood was declining in the Whig period. Harry Dickinson suggests this is due to British abolitionists striving to prove Britain was the true home of liberty, to contrast Napoleon restoring slavery in the French Empire.[7] He adds Lord Castlereagh, the British Foreign Secretary, informed the British ambassador in Madrid “There’s not a village that has not petitioned on it (the slave trade)”. This shows the majority of Britain in the early 1800s agreed with the abolition, thus putting morals and rights above the economic and national gain the slave trade would provide. It must be noted that this idea of using liberty was restrictive in its meaning, as many still saw the dominion over colonies as just. Furthermore, Dickinson later concedes that thousands were still transported until the mid-nineteenth century and alludes to the continued aspects in Ghana and Nigeria into the twentieth century. Marika Sherwood adds Parliament's continued focus on national gain by reducing the tax on slave-grown sugar to the same rate as sugar grown by free workers.[8] As a result, despite the initial timing of the Abolition Act, there is convincing evidence to state the slave trade never truly ended in the nineteenth century, to which even Dickinson admits it was a long process until this inhuman trade was eradicated. The period of Whig, Liberal and Conservative dominion was able to further nationalistic ideas in Britain to a great extent. This created a strong sense of nationhood which Kumar and Mackenzie argue more convincingly than the counterview of Dickinson, who later concedes that nationalistic ideas were still present far into the twentieth century, only significantly changing with the end of the Second World War, with a common attitude towards peace and progression.
The 20th century is one of more mixed attitudes towards whether a sense of nationhood was invoked, with greater emphasis on leaving these ideas. Britain fought in the First World War to retain their status as a great power and its huge empire, as John Higgins writes ‘these interests were threatened to such an extent that it faced no other opportunity but to engage in war’. [9] This view is supported by a letter from the British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey to the British Ambassador in France stating “the neutrality of Belgium might be, I would not say decisive, but an important factor” in attitudes to joining the war, alluding that Britain concerns remain significantly for the Empire, and joining the war would be due primarily to imperial concerns, rather than that of defending a Belgium pact.[10] The British Conservative government under David Lloyd George aimed to keep the British ideology of “splendid isolation” – the idea of making no “external allies” and having “superiority” on a global scale as Canadian premier Sir Wilfrid Laurier described.[11] The Conservative Party in the latter half of the 20th century successfully invoked nationhood with the Falkland War in 1982, in which Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher expressed the invasion of Argentina ‘was a situation of great gravity and as a result was required to send the armed forces to retain the sovereign territory’.[12] This action was accompanied by strong public backing, as Simon Jenkins argued ‘the clear military triumph had been an experience the nation needed, not having enjoyed one since 1945’, resulting in a long-term government under Thatcher, one many historians agree was built on this nationalistic triumph. [13]
Yet these significant singular events fail to show the extent of the decline of imperialistic and nationalistic ideas. The end of the Second World War is seen as the end of sovereignty and that of a nation-state, with the focus shifting to an age of globalisation on a large scale within this latter period. Ben Walsh states that due to the war, ‘parts of the empire began to take an increasingly independent view, due to the number of resources they contributed to the war effort’.[14] As a result, the British government had to sideline national expansion. Another government position was one in which to protect liberty from Nazism on a global scale. If public opinion had not been pro-peace before the war, it had certainly changed to that afterwards, resulting in the newly formed Labour government joining the United Nations in 1945 and accepting the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights. Derek Brown expresses also that Britain joining the UN was a necessity due to the shift of power, with the USA and the USSR the undisputed world superpowers, ones in which ‘the dwindling power of British imperialism would be unable to compete if independent from the world’.[15] This showed the parties, especially in the post-Second World War period had to disown the idea of an independent nation-state to retain public support, focused on security rather than expansion and to keep its status as a world power, even if it was one of delusion.
The war also led to greater influence of social reforms due to the socialist nature of the Labour Party. A Labour government led by Clement Attlee won the 1945 election as many saw this as progressive and whose focus would be on welfare reforms, rather than foreign policy as many governments before. This is seen clearly in the creation of the Welfare State, with two key parts being Keynesian economics and the Beveridge report. Furthermore, Labour created the National Health Service in 1948, which Derek Brown describes as ‘Labour’s greatest monument’. Attlee in 1946 also talks of the critical nature of changing the war economy into a ‘peace economy’ and nationalising a large section of it.[16] He states this would be tackled through increased housing and focus on unemployment, the latter being at one of the lowest points through the century by the end of Attlee’s tenure.[17] Therefore, the post-war Labour government aided in building a sense of nationhood, focusing on the progression of the state economically and socially. Furthermore, the Harold Wilson cabinet of 1964-70 also focussed greatly on social improvements, seen in the swinging sixties and the implementation of the Open University. Wilson later stated founding a new Britain would need to be forged in the ‘white heat’ of a ‘scientific revolution’.[18] Francis adds convincingly this idea again shows the promotion of innovation-driven economic growth from Britain itself, much like under Attlee.[19] Thus, the Labour Party through this latter 20th century did not aim to build a sense of nationhood by retaining the Empire, but rather through economic and social policies on a national scale.
In conclusion, the nineteenth-century period of Whig, Liberal and Conservative domination showed that a sense of nationhood was built largely with the concept of a ‘Great Britain’ coming of age. Nationalism was rooted in public consciousness far into the twentieth century, only significantly changing with the end of the Second World War, with a common attitude towards peace and progression. These two ideas were contributed mainly to the Labour Party through this latter period, which had a more socialist ideology, looking to improve economic and social policies nationally. In contrast, the Conservative Party in this period attempted to return to “Great Britain” and flex its dwindling global power, as shown by the Falklands War.
Bibliography:
Figure 1, Are we afraid, No! 1915, The British Library, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/are-we-afraid-no (accessed 12/05/21)
Attlee, C, Leaders’ Speech, 1946, http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=156 (accessed 14/05/21)
Brown, D, 1945 - Labour and the creation of the welfare state, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/mar/14/past.education, Wed 14 Mar 2001 (accessed 14/05/21)
Dickinson, H, Public Opinion and the Abolition of the Slave Trade, University of Edinburgh, https://crecib.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/09volxvn1dickinson.pdf, pp 137-140, 2008
Francis, M, Harold Wilson’s “white heat of technology speech” 5 years on, The Guardian, Thu 19 Sep 2013, https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2013/sep/19/harold-wilson-white-heat-technology-speech (accessed 14/05/21)
Grey, Sir E, “‘Sir Edward Grey’s Indecisiveness’ – Letter from British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey to British Ambassador to France, Sir Francis Bertie, 31 July 1914, http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Sir_Edward_Grey%E2%80%99s_Indecisiveness (accessed 13/05/21)
Higgins, J, why did Britain join the war against Germany, December 14 2010, E-international Relations, URL = https://www.e-ir.info/2010/12/14/why-did-britain-join-the-war-against-germany/
Jenkins, S, How Margaret Thatcher’s gamble paid off, The Guardian, Tuesday 9th April 2013, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/09/margaret-thatcher-falklands-gamble (accessed 14/05/21)
Kipling, R, The White Man's Burden: The United States and the Philippine Islands, The Times, 4 February 1899
Kohn, H, Political Ideologies of the Twentieth Century, 1949–62 https://www.britannica.com/topic/nationalism, (10/05/21)
Kumar, K, Empire and English Nationalism, Nations and Nationalism 12 (1), 2006
Laurier, Sir W, Description of British situation, February 1896, URL = https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100524374 (accessed 13/05/21)
MacKenzie, J.M, Propaganda and Empire: the manipulation of the British public opinion 1880-1960, Manchester University Press, 1984
MacMillan, H, Address by to Members of both Houses of the Parliament of the Union of South Africa, Cape Town, 3 February 1960
Figure 2, Pettinger, T, UK unemployment rates since 1881, 6 Apr 2016, https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/780/unemployment/unemployment-rates-history/ (accessed 14/05/21)
Sherwood, M, After Abolition, (I.B Taurus, 2007) – reviewed by Shapiro, S, 2008, https://origins.osu.edu/review/after-abolition-britain-and-slave-trade-1807
Thatcher, M, Speech to the House of Commons, 1982, Hansard HC (21/633-38)
Walsh, B, British Empire Overview – 6.Why did the British Empire decline, https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/empire/intro/overview6.htm#:~:text=The%20First%20and%20Second%20World,of%20the%20empire%20after%201945 (accessed 14/05/21)
Wilson, H, white heat of technology speech, 1963, referenced in https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2013/sep/19/harold-wilson-white-heat-technology-speech (accessed 14/05/21)
Wrong, G.M, The Growth of Nationalism in the British Empire, The American Historical Review, Oct. 1916, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Oct. 1916),1916
[1] Hans, Kohn, Political Ideologies of the Twentieth Century, 1949–62 https://www.britannica.com/topic/nationalism - Assessed 10/05/21
[2] Krishan Kumar, Empire and English Nationalism, Nations and Nationalism 12 (1), 1–13, (2006)
[3] J.M, MacKenzie, Propaganda and Empire: the manipulation of the British public opinion 1880-1960, (Manchester University Press, 1984), 274
[4] Figure 1, Are we afraid, No! 1915, The British Library, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/are-we-afraid-no (accessed 12/05/21)
[5] Rudyard Kipling, The White Man's Burden: The United States and the Philippine Islands, The Times, (4 February 1899)
[6] Harold MacMillan, Address by to Members of both Houses of the Parliament of the Union Of South Africa, Cape Town, (3 February 1960)
[7] Harry Dickinson, Public Opinion and the Abolition of the Slave Trade, (University of Edinburgh, 2008), 137-140
[8] Marika Sherwood, After Abolition , (I.B Taurus, 2007) – reviewed by Shapiro, S, 2008, https://origins.osu.edu/review/after-abolition-britain-and-slave-trade-1807
[9] John Higgins, why did Britain join the war against Germany, E-international Relations, (December 14 2010), https://www.e-ir.info/2010/12/14/why-did-britain-join-the-war-against-germany/
[10] Sir Edward Grey, “‘Sir Edward Grey’s Indecisiveness’ – Letter from British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey to British Ambassador to France, Sir Francis Bertie, 31 July 1914, http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Sir_Edward_Grey%E2%80%99s_Indecisiveness - accessed 13/05/21
[11] Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Description of British situation, February 1896, https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100524374 - accessed 13/05/21
[12] Margaret Thatcher, Speech to the House of Commons, (1982), Hansard HC (21/633-38)
[13] Simon Jenkins, How Margaret Thatcher’s gamble paid off, The Guardian, Tuesday 9th April 2013
[14] B. Walsh, British Empire Overview – 6.Why did the British Empire decline, https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/empire/intro/overview6.htm#:~:text=The%20First%20and%20Second%20World,of%20the%20empire%20after%201945 - accessed 14/05/21
[15] Derek Brown, 1945 - Labour and the creation of the welfare state, Wed 14 Mar 2001 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/mar/14/past.education, - accessed 14/05/21
[16] Clement Attlee, Leaders’ Speech, 1946, http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=156 - accessed 14/05/21
[17] Figure 2, T Pettinger, UK unemployment rates since 1881, 6 Apr 2016, https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/780/unemployment/unemployment-rates-history/ - accessed 14/05/21
[18] Harold Wilson, White heat of Technology speech, 1963, https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2013/sep/19/harold-wilson-white-heat-technology-speech - accessed 14/05/21
[19] Matthew Francis, Harold Wilson’s “white heat of technology speech” 5 years on, The Guardian, Thu 19 Sep 2013, https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2013/sep/19/harold-wilson-white-heat-technology-speech - accessed 14/05/21
Comentários