INVENIRE

 The 1945 defeat of the Axis powers, the 2012 Olympic Games and the recent Platinum Jubilee are three events considered to have contributed to national pride in Britain. Given the incessant flag-waving and anthem-singing at all three of these events, the idea that the events alone are the most significant in inducing national pride is understandable. However, the cited reasons for national pride and the approach of governments to history education demonstrate that the historian has the greatest role of all in influencing the level of patriotism in a country. In forming narratives of the past, the historian is more influential in adding to or detracting from national pride than any sportsman, statesman or soldier.  The most apparent demonstrators that historians (and their narratives) are relevant in impacting patriotism are the most oft-cited reasons for national pride. Even beyond explicit statements like "I love my nation because of its history", we find that other professe

We often think of sports as aspects of a group's culture; "basketball is a part of American culture" or "cricket is a part of Indian culture" but instead, we should see sports, with the various rules and conventions that constitute them, as expressions of cultures themselves. Such a perspective helps us comprehend cultures at large - once we understand what sport demands of us, we understand what we derive from sport. The NFL exemplifies this best. From the stadiums that host games to the sport itself, every component of the NFL endeavours to express the national American identity. The NFL and the American nation are co-dependent: the NFL would not sell without the "American" label and American culture would suffer if its most obvious display, the NFL, were to disappear.  The American love for militarism is evident; as a settler-colonial state, much of her land was bought with blood - the blood of Americans and her enemies alike. Between the various wa

Tony Blair and George W. Bush meet at Camp David The liberal assumption that regional differences can be ignored and that cultural vacuums can flourish has led to a global project to export liberalism. The cherished liberal values of unremorseful individualism and representative democracy are believed to be eternal truths that can be exported globally at the expense of local customs. This project of exportation is best described as the liberal colonialist order. Liberal colonialism is so pervasive that it has entrenched itself in the apparatus of the state; in Western nations, governments spend trillions of dollars on the exportation of liberalism via military occupations and foreign aid.  The West's 21st-century involvement in Afghanistan is just one front of a campaign waged by the liberal colonialist order. When redcoat-style imperialism fell out of favour after World War II, Western nations that wished to exert a level of influence on the rest of the world devised new mechanism

Every avid reader has a book they liked the most. However, they may not assign this book the title of “classic” or “great”. Although all classics entertain and make for good reads, entertainment value alone does not earn that title. Speaking to societal constants, classics are the declaratory statements of a people. Classic works of literature captivate public imagination for generations after publication and exemplify that which is most valuable in a culture. When we collate such works, they form a coherent retelling of a people’s history; we should defend such work from modern fevers that aim to denounce them as anachronistic and undeserving of elevation within a culture. Shakespeare is the gold standard in English literature. All authors, irrespective of their era, are judged against him and his work has been immortalised in school curricula and the English cultural consciousness. But why? We guarantee no other author the right to be taught in English secondary schools year after ye

Historians are not merely retellers of the past. Their work demands an intellectual struggle. After discerning what occurred from various, often contradictory, sources, historians must then place these events in the context of one another. There are various methods of performing the latter; these methods are known as philosophies of history. Philosophies of history attempt to make sense of the thousands of years of recorded human existence by asking a few key questions. Is there an overarching meaning to the events of human history? Is there a direction to history?  If so, what is history's direction? Is the direction linear? If it is linear, does this mean circumstances are improving?   In politics, ideologies are the vehicles of policy. But where do ideologies come from? All ideologies are the offspring of philosophies of history. If you believe material conditions to be the vehicle of historical change, you are a Marxist. If you believe history to be a constant ascendancy toward

In the opening chapter of The Communist Manifesto, Bourgeois and Proletarians , Marx outlines his view of history. "Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian... oppressor and oppressed."  Marx believed that all history had been a struggle between two classes: the oppressive and the oppressed. In this vein, left-wing nationalists the world over have positioned themselves as the oppressed class within this dichotomy. The modern Manchester Marxist might add "Westminster and Northumbria" to that list. Although almost undiscussed just a few years ago, there is a growing movement amongst socialists in Northern England to secede from the United Kingdom. The Northern Independence Party (NIP) was founded in October 2020, motivated by the belief that the United Kingdom is an illegitimate, ill-founded union and that the Westminster government has been neglectful of Northern England. The NIP now has 1300 members and its Twitter account, which uses the handle  @FreeNorthNow , ha

Donald Trump is a 21st century Andrew Jackson. He mirrors his ascent to power and has been characterised almost identically by his opponents. Men like Trump and Jackson are evidence of a popular desire for powerful governance; people will ignore authoritarian tactics in search of an efficient leader. Image courtesy of Al Drago/The New York Times While Jackson and Trump both presented themselves as defenders of common Americans, it is inaccurate to describe their politics as an appeal to the marginalised. Jackson was concerned with elevating a particular section of the American poor: the white male population. He was vehemently opposed to the abolition of slavery, owning slaves himself and believing it to be vital to the Southern economy. Jackson's rhetoric on economic issues sought to re-empower those who had lost property in the Panic of 1819. The Trump campaign of 2016 mirrored this style of populism immensely; in his announcement speech, he appealed to the unemployed, but he onl