The problem with England – why the unrest in the UK has not spread to Scotland and Wales

The violent riots that caused so much damage in Britain did not, in reality, take place across the whole of the United Kingdom. They were confined almost entirely to England.

Although violent riots also occurred in Belfast, Northern Ireland, it is interesting to note that even there they were largely carried out by British loyalists and some right-wing extremists from Dublin. The counter-protesters appeared to be mostly from Northern Ireland's Catholic community.

At least so far, Scotland and Wales have remained peaceful. To consider why this is so, we should look at the position of the English within the United Kingdom.

The Union itself was primarily an English product. It was the English crown that extended its power first to the British Isles and then to a large part of the world. The Acts of Union of 1707 between England and Scotland led to the creation of Great Britain. The English and Welsh crowns had already been “united” much earlier, in 1284, under the auspices of the former, and after the partition of Ireland, Northern Ireland joined the Union in 1922.

Want more political coverage from academic experts? Each week we bring you in-depth analysis of developments in government and verify the claims made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletterdelivered every Friday.

While the Scots, Welsh and Irish played a significant role in the administration of the British Empire, the English were its driving force. This means that the English were arguably more affected by the diminishing role of Britain in the world as the British Empire disintegrated.

A 2018 YouGov poll found that almost three times as many people in England thought the country's best years were in the past rather than in the future. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, however, many more people believe “their country's best years are ahead of them rather than behind them”.

A “nostalgic longing” for lost imperial power is an integral part of this nostalgic English national image. This also explains why demonstrators and rioters chanted “Rule Britannia”.

Rule Britannia was written and set to music in England in 1740 and soon became associated with British imperial power. It is still sung at the Last Night of the Proms (a prestigious annual music event) and by English sports fans, demonstrating once again the extent to which the English confuse England and Britain.

If the loss of empire and perceived global prestige is one aspect of English melancholy, then changing relationships within the United Kingdom are another. Many English people continue to treat “British” and “English” as interchangeable terms. When asked, they find it difficult to distinguish between the two.

In the same 2018 YouGov survey, 80% of residents of England strongly identified as English, but 82% also strongly identified as British, indicating that “British and English identities are closely intertwined.” 2021 census data shows that in England, 14.9% identified exclusively as English and 54.8% identified exclusively as British. In Scotland, the corresponding figures were 56% (Scots only) and 15% (British only), and in Wales, 55.2% (Welsh only) and 18.5% (British only).

The fact that England was not involved in the devolution process has added to this confusion – and increased English resentment. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own national governments and assemblies, but there is no separate administration to deal with purely English matters.

Not only does this reinforce the idea that English and British are one and the same, but it also fuels resentment among English people who feel that people in other parts of the UK are getting their own representation. This is particularly true for English people who live geographically and culturally far from London, the centre of power in the UK.

This also helps to explain why Brexit, with its aim of “taking back control”, was supported primarily by English voters rather than those in other parts of the UK.

The same 2018 YouGov poll also shows that the English nation is predominantly perceived by its members as a white nation, with only a third of respondents saying that “the diversity of their country is an important part of their identity.”

The warning signals were there

Anti-immigration sentiment is certainly not limited to England. The opposition between “locals” and “foreigners” is at the root of any national mindset, so it is possible that anti-immigration protests could flare up elsewhere in the UK. However, both Scotland and Wales have been able to provide more progressive and inclusive narratives of nationhood that not only recognise ethnic diversity but also articulate themselves as opposition to dominant English.

It therefore seems plausible to assume that the anomaly of the English – a powerful majority who often feel overlooked and ignored within the British nation – could play a role in explaining the current wave of protests and unrest.

During the last two European football championships, hopes for a new, progressive, inclusive and forward-looking England seemed to be burgeoning. The current violent protests have significantly dented those hopes. But simply pointing the finger at far-right thugs, as the government has done, and dismissing the unrest as mere criminal incidents does not really get to the heart of the problem. Although far-right extremists were at the centre of it, right behind them were many ordinary English people, men and women, some with children, who presumably shared the same views and feelings.

Although only 8% of Britons said they sympathized with the rioters in a recent YouGov poll, 58% expressed sympathy with the peacefully protesting citizens.

Once all the chaos on the streets has been cleared up, it would be wise for the Government and society as a whole to have a debate about what 'England' and 'Englishness' mean in a Union deeply divided by rising nationalism, and in a world where Britannia no longer rules the seas.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Marco Antonsich receives funding from the British Academy.

Michael Skey receives funding from the Arts & Humanities Research Council. He is a member of Amnesty International and Liberty