For the first time, I am observing a visible backlash against the United States by a significant portion of British society. A poster on a forum I was reading was looking to buy mobile phone brands which were not made by American companies. This was an unusual contrast to similar threads, over half a decade ago now, once wanting to boycott China. The trend is not an outliner, a recent opinion poll by Opinium found that 32% of the British public now regard the United States as a “threat” above being a “friend.” Even during the biggest waves of American criticism in Britain, such as the Iraq War, or even the first Trump administration, such widespread opinions were once unimaginable and socially stigmatising.
The triggering factor behind this of course is the shockwave brought about by Donald Trump’s demand to annex Greenland, a sovereign European territory. For a few years I was an ardent public critic of America’s foreign policy, but in comparison to British public opinion as a general whole, this was a radical and fringe view, one which was often met with severe personal costs. After all, it is extremely easy to drown out criticism of the US’s actions when the target is a non-western country which is easily justified and simplified by the discourse of “human rights and democracy,” but perhaps it is more challenging when the President of the United States is making overt territorial demands against Europe with absolutely zero-justification behind it whatsoever, backed by the threat of military force.
Thus, I can only feel vindicated that the British public are finally waking up to the reality that: 1) The United Kingdom exists in a relationship of subservience to the United States 2) The so-called “Special Relationship” is not a “Special Relationship” at all, but one where Britian simply follows whatever is asked of it by Washington, even if it is damaging to the National Interest to do so, and receives nothing in return. In raw national interest terms, it is of course extremely important that Britain has a relationship with the United States, and I am thus distancing myself from what I will describe as the stupidity and futility of so-called “Anti Imperialist struggle” against them, which is a non-starter in the British context, but this does not need to be “subservience” in the way it has been.
It logically follows given such a relationship, that one of the biggest problems of the British political right and nationalism is that it has absolutely no other vision or plan for Britain’s foreign policy other than to advocate following the US even more, blinded by the allure of Anglophone exceptionalism. Brexit was about abandoning Europe in the hope of a fantasy trade deal with the United States that never happened (they insists on one-sided terms), Nigel Farage has effectively lip-synced his own positions with those of Donald Trump, and the most aggressive Anti-China MPs, such as Iain Duncan Smith, are obvious inputs of American influence. It goes without saying on that note that even as Trump repulses the British public, the media is awash with Anti-China hysteria pushing the fundamental connotation that any closer relationship with Beijing is a bad thing, all while Keir Starmer gives him multiple Royal visits.
Britain’s entire foreign policy outlook is effectively blinkered by ideology and has little space for actual “practical” national interests. This produces an unquestionable subservience to the United States which has compromised the past 80 years of post-war diplomacy in an uncomfortable tug of war between Washington and Brussels, making independent national interest-based decision making impossible. As I said, however, going full on Anti-America in the British context is not only politically and structurally impossible, but outright undesirable. Instead, my advocation is that Britain must now end this “rite of passage” to follow America blindly, and that the “special relationship” must be downgraded to pragmatically what I will call “the friendly relationship.” In sentimental terms, America is a culturally close and friendly country to Britain, and there are many things about the United States to enjoy and admire as there are to revile and be sceptical of. However, this should be a “friendship” and not a “marriage.” We are friendly to America, but we are not “bound” to them. Not everything that is in their interest, is in our interest.
In taking this step, we have to structurally then accommodate for Britain’s sense of weakness by fundamentally challenging the post-1945 thinking that the decline of the country has to be “accepted” and allowing America to fill the role as our primary advocate, which we then tag along with. While it is true, if you ask me, that Britain has suffered horrendous economic, social, and cultural decline, the liberal mindset that sees this as a good thing has to be discarded, for the greater good of the country. The reason my political views have always been unconventional throughout life is primarily because I have uniquely bore the brunt of British decline, and have grew up as a “have not” in the political sense.
I was born into a Post-Industrial Sunderland in 1992; its lifeblood had been ripped out by government decisions to decimate British industry, creating mass unemployment and social deterioration. From a poor family, I grew up in a world of major social disorder, moral and family decay, helplessness, abuse, contempt for authority, students who did not want to learn in school, and a total absence of dreams, good advice, and vision. These experiences are precisely why I have grown up with little appeal for “status quo” ways of thinking, why I have deeply admired Asian culture (seeing actual stability and proper behaviour) and moreover, recognised something is deeply wrong with my own country. I am fringe, because I have been fringe all my life and never had the comfort of benefitting from a “status quo” ideology.
The question is, will anything change? Will Britain finally make a break with this self-implosion? I can’t say I’m too confident.
Tom Fowdy 