Flags Don't Make Patriots

Two Cities Changing

As I stepped out for a walk traversing the cities of Manchester and Salford, I noticed many changes in places I had not visited in quite a while; I'm talking a couple of years.

However, what was more interesting were the Union Jack flags flying on lampposts in some performative display of what some might think is patriotism.

The Absence of Historical Understanding

Frankly, I am quite unimpressed because patriotism requires a keen understanding and sense of history that would suggest learning and study. I cannot ascertain that some of the agitators in this cause have acquired such knowledge.

For instance, I am an Englishman as I am British. My parents were born in Nigeria when it was part of the British Empire, and hence they were, into early adulthood, subjects of the Crown before Nigeria gained independence in 1960.

By the good fortune of providence, I was born in England, and at that time we automatically acquired citizenship by birth.

When Ignorance Meets Aggression

One man, because I looked different and had an accent, had the temerity to question my status in an aggressively racist rant on a train some years ago. Other fellow citizens called the police on him, and after spending the night in a cell, he was prosecuted, convicted, and paid fines totalling £750.

If he had had a basic appreciation of British history and the context of the brutality of the British Empire happening abroad, whilst the profits built stately homes here, he might have been restrained and saved himself the humiliating consequence of baseless assumptions. But that expectation is like casting pearls before swine.

True Patriotism Requires No Flag

I do not need a flag to be patriotic. I do my civic duty by voting, and if called for jury service, I will attend. I belong in a society of values: fairness, justice, respect, and the consideration of others, knowing no one is above the law.

I believe we should treat each other with dignity and courtesy, seeking to live harmoniously with others regardless of race, creed, class, gender, ability, orientation, or status.

Identity Beyond Symbols

In all those situations of understanding and celebrating our Britishness, it is not flags that matter, but our sense of identity expressed in our humanity towards having a common purpose to make our world a better place.

That is why I think hoisting flags is an empty gesture. It is not representative of any particular value; it is, in essence, patriotism misguided and probably informed by a position of ignorance.

A Google NotebookLM AI Podcast on this blog

A decade after the Lord Babington blog

The falsely crafted quotation from an address attributed to Lord Macaulay. It never happened.

That Lord Macauley quote

The longevity of my blog would as a matter of interest suggest a celebratory review of something I have written before, and none more signifies that than a blog I wrote exactly 10 years ago.

As usual, it was written as a simple opinion piece about erroneous quotations of antiquity attributed to someone which on closer scrutiny revealed that the quote was first fabricated and definitely not spoken by the person or at the location it was said to have been relayed.

Blog - Opinion: Lord Macauley did not address the British Parliament in 1835 (18-05-2013)

That did not stop people wanting something manifestly wrong in content, person, or place to be true and they gathered on my blog to both defend the indefensible and assert sentimentality over objectivity. At one time, it felt like a backstreet brawl in some Indian city where many were about to come to some serious harm. Heck! I was even threatened, on my own blog, just because I had an opinion.

Battles and ratings

I never took the blog down, because that would be wrong, but I did at certain times close the blog to comments when nationalistic elements decided my blog was a place to vent their historical grievances and those that did not align with my polite commentary guidelines, I removed for the simple reason that if you want to engage in conversation or debate, you do that with respect and courtesy.

However, in that decade besides the over 36,400 views of the blog and 42 comments that put it at the all-time high ranking of interactions with my blog, it is interesting to see how the relationship between the British Empire of the 19^th Century where India was the crown jewel has changed within the first quarter of the 21^st Century.

Fortunes and history

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is of Indian heritage in Rishi Sunak and India surpassed the UK to become the fifth largest economy in the world, having been the 11^th just a decade ago.

If one can manage a dig at the Tories who have been in government since May 2010, they have superintended a managed decline of the UK economy how they even are thought the party of business escapes me. [World Economic Forum: India surpasses UK economy]

Maybe, and just maybe, the Indian nationalists that camped on my blog a decade ago can take some consolation from this change in fortunes, but one can think they would be insatiable in their quest to prove a point. Meanwhile, my blog can sometimes be a battlefield, I just inadvertently provided ammunition too.

Opinion: Lord Macauley did not address the British Parliament in 1835

Comments are open again

I have decided not to allow the irritation of one person to spoil the open forum for interaction on my blog. I have removed all trace of his views and blacklisted him.

We are strangers here and the least that we can expect of each other regardless of our views, is respect, courtesy and dignified expression. You fall short; you fall out.

Closing Comments Update - 1^st November 2013: In view of certain recent developments in the comments section of this blog, I have decided to close this blog to any new comments.

A more comprehensive note appears below the text of the blog.

Update – 26^th July 2013: Having had so much traffic to this blog, it has become necessary to add more information and references about the quote, the context, the person and the somewhat ulterior motives that seem to govern the release of what I might refer to as "Internet Apocrypha".

I will advise anyone who is thinking of commenting on this opinion piece to first exhaustively go through the links provided within and below the article and appreciate the import of each submission, and then, if there is any desire to debunk any of the claims, please provide reference, attribution and accessible sources to support your views.

Thanks.

Akin Akintayo – 26^th July 2013

Shared on Facebook

A few hours ago, I came upon a picture taken of a supposed speech made to the British Parliament on Facebook and the healthy sceptic that I am had to review the content to determine if this was true or not.

A quick search, though inconclusive proved my doubts and though I left a comment on the feature, soon afterwards the posting was removed in its entirety along with all the opinions expressed about it.

My control

That is probably what I fear the most about participating in the many forums on the Internet outside my control, the sudden disappearance of an opinion, a view or a comment so succinctly made at a moment in time representing my contemporaneous thinking which I may never be able to reproduce if it is lost.

This informs the reason why I mainly stick to writing on my blog where my views cannot be tampered with by editors or syndicators – my cubicle serves its purpose well.

The speech

“I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in the country, such high moral values, people of such caliber, that I do not think we would conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.” [Wikipedia]

Intent unexpressed

Now, with regards to the picture above and the words transcribed there is probable cause to believe that there was intent by the British Empire as it spread its tentacles in the 19^th Century; I had my doubts that they were expressed as such, especially in Parliament.

Sensational and inflammatory as it definitely is, it can be used to whip up nationalist fervour and jingoism for the ways in which colonialism and imperialism raped the colonies but if we are historically incorrect in attempting to harness a sentiment for polemics and so political gain, eventually the truth of such manipulation will be revealed, but long after the mob has been excited to wreak havoc on our peace.

Quite improbable

Now, this speech was said to have been made by Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1st Baron Macaulay on the 2^nd of February 1835 to the British Parliament. This would have been difficult, if he left for India in 1834 and returned in 1838 serving on the Supreme Council of India.

The fastest ships of that time managed 5 to 6 knots and this was before the time of the Clippers, Suez Canal did not open until 1869, so with a basic calculation of London to Bombay via Cape Town, a distance of 10,721 nautical miles with no days spent at port, an average one-way trip to India will take just over 74 days. [Using Sea Distances – Voyage Calculator]

This was not a journey to be taken lightly if you were based in India in the 19^th Century; it is quite unlikely that T. B. Macaulay made a speech to the British Parliament in 1935.

Minutes

Then one might ask how this got attributed to him. He did take minutes on the 2^nd of February 1835 on the issue of Indian Education but those minutes do not contain the said words, it is suggested that the words might well have been an embellished paraphrase of a number of opinions that the man might have expressed in different documents and letters.

Apparently, the East India Company had been given the monopoly to trade with India and was instructed by the British Parliament to spend 100,000 Rupees on promoting the education of Indian natives. [Source - Doc]

“The Company officials were divided on the kind of education to be promoted – will it be the indigenous system of education, or a new education system patterned along the British system of education.” The context of T. B. Macaulay’s minutes a subject of the English Education Act of 1835 were implemented in India in 1854 was advocating the promotion of European style education over the indigenous system.

The reprehensible thinking of those times

There are other words that are apparently attributed to Lord Macaulay and this follows the thinking of colonialists of that time; on page 325 in Essays, Critical and Miscellaneous, by Thomas Babington Macaulay, Baron Macaulay, we find the paragraph below as also corroborated in Callaloo Nation, by Aisha Khan.

“There never, perhaps, existed a people so thoroughly fitted by nature and by habit for a foreign yoke.”

This reads no different in context and understanding that Lord Lugard proffered of Africans in his book, The Dual Mandate in British Tropical Africa in 1922, where he said, “In character and temperament, the typical African of this race-type is a happy, thriftless, excitable person; lacking in self control, discipline, and foresight ...” I covered this in my Apes Obey Series.

Debunk the fallacies, always

I expect the picture to go viral as it gets shared and commented on by readers on Facebook, Twitter and other Social Media forums, it might even catch the eye of some newspapers on its way to becoming a meme, many not bothering to verify the information and ascertain its provenance, veracity and correctness with historical fact.

As to the exact words spoken or written by Baron Macaulay, many of which might be in dispute, one can only end on the damning excoriation of taking things at face value exemplified in these words authored by someone who did not sign their contributions to this debate. “Available in the archives to genuine researchers. Not for followers of the ‘If it cannot be Googled it did not happen’ doctrine.” I hear you.

Other notes added 26^th July 2013

In response to a comment that was posted recently, this piece was attributed to Lord Macaulay in 1835, well, in 1835, he was Mr Thomas Macaulay, he did not become Lord Macaulay until August 1857, which would suggest this was an attribution as a reported event rather than diary event, else, the postscript would say Mr Thomas Macaulay who became Lord Macaulay.

There is no reference in the Hansard of any speech, address, opinion, bill or comment by Mr Thomas Macaulay in the years from 1834 to 1838 inclusive.

Mr Thomas Macaulay apparently took up an appointment on the Supreme Council of India between 1834 and 1838 for which he was paid £50,000 to help pay off debts his father had accrued. [Spartacus Educational Biography]

There is another view that the real documented quote made by Mr Thomas Macaulay, though again unproven is below - the research continues:

“I accept catholic beyond the across and across of India and I accept not apparent one getting who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such abundance I accept apparent in this country, such top moral values, humans of such caliber, that I do not anticipate we would anytime beat this country, unless we breach the actual courage of this nation, which is her airy and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I adduce that we alter her old and age-old apprenticeship system, her culture, for if the Indians anticipate that all that is adopted and English is acceptable and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their built-in self-culture and they will become what we ambition them, a absolutely bedeviled nation.” [WikiQuote]

Pertinent References

(These must be reviewed before posting a comment challenging the opinions stated here.)

Talk:Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1st Baron Macaulay – The WikiQuote analysis of this purported speech.

Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1st Baron Macaulay – The Wikipedia entry.

Biography of Thomas Babington Macaulay – From Spartacus Educational, here, it noted that he was ennobled in August 1857, that is when he became Lord Macaulay.

Minute by the Hon'ble T. B. Macaulay, dated the 2nd February 1835. – From Bureau of Education. Selections from Educational Records, Part I (1781-1839). Edited by H. Sharp.  Calcutta: Superintendent, Government Printing, 1920. Reprint. Delhi: National Archives of India, 1965, 107-117.

Macaulay's “Minute Upon Indian Education” In the English Education Act 1835. – Wikipedia.

Mr Thomas Macaulay – Hansard References

A dubious quotation, a controversial reputation: the merits of Lord Macaulay – An exhaustive study of Lord Macaulay by Koenraad Elst – This must be read.

Macaulay's Minute revisited - Ramachandra Guha – The Hindu

Lord MacAulay’s Speech to British Parliament 1835 – Robert Lindsay on whipping up nationalist sentiment with contrived and false quotes.

Finally to put this all in context - The Curse of the Internet: Fake Historical Quotes

Dear Reader,

After almost 6 months of having written this blog with over 6,000 reads and all together 39 comments, I have decided to close this blog to new comments.

I appreciate everyone who has found time to read what I have written and have left comments either in support of or against the views expressed here.

Many, times, I have reiterated that the purpose of this blog is to dispute the letter of quote attributed to Lord Macaulay; at no time, I have suggested that colonialists have not practiced the spirit of the forgery attributed to the man.

My basic premise has been, if we are to be beacons of truth and justice, our activism and agitation must be based on the truth and the facts, never on fabricated quotes to suit our sentiments and subjective views. See - The Curse of the Internet: Fake Historical Quotes

Recently, the comments have digressed from the purpose and context of this blog; they have become unhelpful and do nothing to further the debate. I did not write this blog to entertain idle retired trolls.

I have suffered his views for long enough that I have decided to close this blog to new comments.

Everyone has a forum in the greater, bigger world of the Internet to publish their concurrence or disagreement and link back to this blog, if they so wish.

Thank you for reading and visiting my blog, I am honoured if providence has led you here whether you have gain anything or not from reading my blog.

With the kindest regards,

Akin Akintayo - 1^st November 2013

Egalitarianism is a pipe-dream

When the Queen speaks

The Commonwealth represents the extent to which the British Empire grew in the 19th Century which then diminished in the first half of the 20th Century.

Mozambique is the only country that has no historical ties to the Commonwealth, but has joined this community on the realisation that it is surrounded by other countries including the rogue Zimbabwean state.

On gaining independence, a number of countries became republics and had the complete mantle of government vested in the local citizenry. The Queen’s representative in those countries then becomes a British government representative with the title of Ambassador.

Where the countries have not adopted a republican status, the figure-head head of government as the Queen’s representative in that country is the Governor-General. Canada and Australia are not republics.

Many of those former British Empire states started off as democracies and descended into governmental chaos when certain groups grabbed the reins of government as a right rather than elective privilege.

This was worsened by other factions, feeling marginalised and resorting to arms and plunging their countries into civil war and complete anarchy.

Others either had years of military misrule or populist governments that abused the rule of law and all due process.

The Commonwealth is more peaceful now, though the last meeting of governments did threaten to undo the relationship. Zimbabwe and Pakistan remain outsiders for misrule and military dictatorship respectively.

Anyway, every Christmas day at 15:00 hrs GMT the Queen’s Christmas message is relayed to the Commonwealth. The message is supposed to cover issues of the year, the hopes, the fears, the thanks and the regrets.

However, this traditional atmosphere is continually getting a touch of modernisation, one expects the speeches of the near future to be the Queen rapping her message on Top of the Pops. God forbid!

The Queen represents a documented and traceable heritage of history, circumstance and development of the British identity. Though the class structures of feudal servitude have all but disappeared, these have evolved creating new battle lines.

The moneyed, the celebrity, the politician, the fan, the deprived, the refugee now make up the obvious classes. However, the class struggles along the erstwhile lines still continue without specific appellation.

The equality of democracy as we know it does not produce the liberality of a government of the people, by the people for the people. No modern democracy can boast of that lofty definition in practice.

Rather the government of the day seeks to impose a set of class values on majority society, where they are mostly in government with less than 35% of the total enfranchised population.

On Christmas day, the Queen reminds us of history, how society has evolved and gives a time frame to the era we live in. The Second Elizabethan era of the late 20th Century which now includes the early 21st Century?

Long live the Queen - by the which we know our identity as members of the Commonwealth.

An Englishman abroad.