Is Obama anti-British? The Limey view.

Dan Hannan is a rising star of the right, an MEP who wreaks havoc amongst the Brussels politicos because he is just too smart and articulate for them to keep up with him. He came to wider attention when he slaughtered Broon when that article addressed the European parliament. The video on u-tube registered gazillions of hits. His piece was about O’s attitude to UK, not about the so-called ‘special relationship’. This exists at the ‘people’ level, not the political. Lord Palmerston summed it up:

Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.

Kissinger pinched it as ‘America has no friends only interests’; not quite so eloquent.

I very much doubt whether O’s dad was either in the Mau Mau or detained by the beastly Brits. My recollection (and it was a long time ago) is that Mau Mau was exclusive to the Kikuyu. Only 32 whites were killed by the Mau Mau, the huge number of others being Africans, including Kikuyu. The hard core was ex-soldiers from the Kings African Rifles who had served in Burma and were therefore highly experienced in jungle warfare.

But as we both know, come independence and everyone was suddenly an ex-freedom fighter.

If O returned the bust of Winnie because of his role in suppressing the Mau Mau, this shows that O doesn’t know his history. The uprising was from 1952 to 1960. Winnie resigned in 1953. The villain of the piece was an idiot Colonial Secretary called, if I remember rightly, James Griffiths. He enraged the indigenous populations by giving the minority Asians, who then as now were heartily disliked by Africans, far more seats on the Legislative Council, than to African politicians. In doing so he instantly converted a barbarous Kikuyu terrorist insurgency into a national freedom movement. Perhaps this is where O’s grandpappy came in.

Although nobody cared a toss about O’s humiliation of Broon, we did care about his behaviour to the Prime Minister of Great Britain. And we thought that the presents fiasco was simply demeaning to our American buddies.

Like you I thought that O’s approach on foreign policy was more mature than his predecessor’s, and has been competently handled by Hillary. As for him failing to mention the British presence in Afghanistan, Dubya never once mentioned that more Brits were killed on 9/11 than in any other single terrorist attack, despite 30 years of the IRA.

Although we are joined at hip and thigh by legal tradition, language (after a fashion), multiparty democratic governance, and many other matters, one huge difference is the impact of religion on politics and on society. In England (I speak not for the Celtic fringe) it has no significance whatsoever. We are not necessarily unbelievers as non-worshippers.

A recent survey summarised by the Economist reveals that in American politics religion is of the highest importance, often in a deleterious way. In society it is the glue that holds the nation together. Interestingly, Americans are not bothered about denomination or whether they are Christian or Jew, provided that you are God-fearing. Unsurprisingly, this does not apply to Islam, but Americans also dislike Buddhists. What on earth have the most gentle and peace-loving of people done to get up your noses?

Anti-Americanism is an essential qualification for Guardianistas, especially for those who have never visited the US and know little about it. Of course there are stereotypes, but the essence of stereotypes is that they are broadly true. For example the Yanks and the Aussies believe that Brits are largely unacquainted with the bathtub; get a whiff of bouquet Anglais on an early morning commuter train and you will have physical proof. The Aussies reckon that in England the safest place to keep your money is under the bath soap. The Yanks believe that we have terrible teeth. Mostly very true. The English have always had a reputation for drunkenness, lascivious women, and a love of fighting. Plus ca change.

Otherwise, the Brits visit America in humungous numbers, and the holiday home market in Florida is heavily UK-orientated.

I firmly believe that we Brits regard the ‘special relationship’ as a somewhat dysfunctional family that have their differences but will turn on any third party that meddles. We have distrust of Europeans that is in our DNA because over the last 2,000 years they have arrived on these shores – or tried – as invaders. Contemporary history suggests to me that the French in particular are still bent on wrecking the Anglosphere, for example, by shackling hedge funds through EU restrictions despite the fact that almost all hedge-fund business is in the UK.

Flanders and Swan put it this way:

It's not that they're wicked or naturally bad

It's just that they're foreign that makes them so mad

The English are all that a nation should be

And the pride of the English are Chipper and me

The English the English the English are best

I wouldn't give tuppence for all of the rest

.