Britain's identity-forming election

Two lesser parties in the May 7 election are doing well enough to challenge Britain’s unity and its bonds with Europe. Voters must remember how peace and security were achieved by a comity of common values. 

|
REUTERS
Ed Miliband the leader of the Labour Party, Leanne Wood the leader of Plaid Cymru, Nicola Sturgeon the leader of the Scottish National Party, and David Cameron the leader of the Conservative Party and Britain's current prime minister take part in an April 2 televised debate Salford, England.

Walk around Britain before its May 7 election and you probably won’t hear people asking these questions about their political identity: 

“Are we European?” 

“Are we British?”

“Are we a great power anymore?”

Yet these existential questions hang over the election simply because of the possible outcomes. Neither the Labour Party nor the Conservative Party, which have alternated power for decades, is expected to win an outright victory. Instead, two lesser parties, which by their very nature raise such questions, could make a strong showing and then influence a new coalition in Parliament. 

One is the Scottish National Party, which was able to convince 45 percent of Scots to vote for independence in a referendum last year. That near-miss in ending three centuries of union with England not only revived the party for this election but also enlivened the breakaway nationalists in Northern Ireland and Wales. 

The other party, the United Kingdom Independence Party, is both anti-European Union and anti-immigrant. Its rising popularity has forced Labour and the Tories to grow cool toward the EU rather than to maintain Britain’s historical bonds with the Continent. 

Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron promises a referendum on Britain’s membership in the EU, if his party wins. And Labour’s political platform on the EU under leader Ed Miliband asserts British interests against the EU consensus far more than it does the benefits of a Europe that ensures peace and a common market.

As The Economist magazine summed up about this election, “Britain has never been in such an all-round querulous state.”

Elections are usually a choice about government priorities. Indeed both the Tories and Labour have hotly debated the country’s health system and their different visions of economic policy. “Nationalism never built a single school or lifted people out of poverty,” says Mr. Miliband. 

But below the surface is a contest over both being British and European, two identities that long reflected a comity of common values and that helped Britain achieve high levels of prosperity and security. 

With Greece defying its EU partners over needed reforms and a divided Ukraine trying to enter the EU, this election needs to set a model. British voters must focus more on their shared identity with each other and with Europe than on differences. To retain its great-power status, Britain should look to the bonds that built its greatness.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Britain's identity-forming election
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2015/0505/Britain-s-identity-forming-election
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe