Nationalism and religion are making a comeback. In his recent article in The Church Times, David Cameron claimed that Britain is a Christian nation, and urged Christians to be more evangelical about their faith.
UKIP, meanwhile, is riding high in the polls and gained seats in councils and the European parliament with its message that the UK, having all the resources it needs within its borders to thrive in our globalised world, should withdraw from Europe and close Britain’s borders to immigration.
Both messages have their appeal. Cameron’s message appeals to those who feel that Britain’s Christian culture is being eroded, particularly by issues such as gay marriage. UKIP’s message appeals to a range of voters, from Eurosceptics who argue against EU membership on economic grounds, to UKIP’s core support base who are financially struggling, disadvantaged, low skilled, and intensely concerned about the effects of immigration on their lives.
In a democracy, the concerns of voters, expressed through the ballot box and in peaceful protest, are a powerful means of making social progress. The valid concerns of the UK’s Christians and nationalists therefore need to be heard and acted upon. In particular, the large protest vote which UKIP is attracting is the direct result of a financial crisis brought on by a party political system which rewards the rich at the expense of the majority – a system that has changed little since the crisis began.
Appealing though these messages are to some, however, Cameron’s Christian Britain and UKIP’s British nationalism must both be roundly rejected. They must be rejected because they threaten core principles on which Britain’s democracy is built.
Elections are only part of what makes up a democracy. The rule of law applied equally to all regardless of wealth or status, the separation of the state in practice from any religious denomination, protection of human rights for minorities that are enforceable in law, and cultures of tolerance which accept the principle of equality regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation – all of these add up to the British model of liberal democracy.
Cameron’s declaration that Britain is a Christian country threatens one of these democratic principles. Few would argue with Cameron’s assertion in his Church Times article, that ‘the Christian values of responsibility, hard work, charity, compassion, humility, and love are shared by people of every faith and none – and we should be confident in standing up to defend them.’ But as Cameron acknowledges; there is nothing uniquely Christian about such values, which are widely held by many non-Christians too.
Other values, which Christianity shares with other faiths, are not quite so empowering. Most religions share the claim that they alone possess infallible knowledge of the word of God, that proof for this claim is not necessary, and that oppression of those who dissent is justified for the good both of unbelievers and of the wider faith community.
These claims are particularly dangerous given the bewildering array of contradictory claims that can be found in the holy books. As Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith, argues, the view that there is ‘much that is wise and consoling and beautiful in our religious books’, can be taken as equally valid as the remark that ‘the Bible and Koran both contain mountains of life-destroying gibberish.’ Centuries of religious war-fare, and today’s evening news, show that this potent mix of love and hate is an unreliable basis for the affairs of government. In fact this mix gives religion tremendous power as a propaganda tool in the hands of zealots.
UKIP’s version of nationalism meanwhile threatens another pillar of British democracy, admittedly one that many Britains are far from comfortable with. Just as the separation of church and state protects citizens against rule by religious tyrants, another safeguard against tyranny emerged from the ruins of Europe after the Second World War, namely the development of what has now become the European Union. In the aftermath of that War, European nations created political institutions in which bitter enemies pooled aspects of their sovereignty in an explicit attempt to secure lasting peace.
In the wake of the financial crisis it is easy to forget that the institutions of the European Union – the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the European Court of Justice – were formed not primarily for economic reasons, but rather to prevent former enemies from ever waging war against each other again. As Putin is reminding us, reversion to parochial nationalism can quickly wind back the clock to nightmarish times we thought were forever in the past.
Religion and nationalism share another unsavoury characteristic – both are often used to justify bigotry. The unfortunate fact is that religion and nationalism are two of the forces in the modern world that can be utilised to make racism, sexism and homophobia acceptable. Religion can provide a haven for sexists and homophobes as much as nationalism can provides succour for racists. And that undermines democracy.
Democracy is not simply majority rule. Democracy is expressly designed to provide protection for minorities, not only against the tyranny of government, but also against the prejudice and inhumanity of their fellow man. Cultures that value equality and celebrate difference help provide that protection. And equality for all regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation is not just about the safety and freedom of people of colour, women, and gays and lesbians – it is about the safety and freedom of us all.
The overthrow of the tyranny both of dictators and of oppressive cultures has been a prerequisite for the development of more humane societies and the emergence of a more civilised world. It is hard to see how either Cameron’s Christian Britain or UKIP’s British nationalism will help bring about a more humane or a more civilised Britain.