Can English people explain how they feel about this?

[Green215]

As an English person, do you hold resentment towards any country based on historical grievances like war, invasion, famine, colonialism etc? If so, which; if not, why?

The reason I ask is because I’ve always found it odd how the English tend to be the only people in the world who do not hold such grievances.

Irish people are always complaining about British colonialism; many Scots and Welsh likewise complain about England on a historical basis; Greeks and Turks complain about one another; Africans, Indians, Arabs etc complain about European colonialism and American invasions; China complains about Japanese atrocities and vice versa; Russia complains about German atrocities; post-Soviet states complain about Russian occupation; France and Germany complain about one another; America often complains about the Revolution; Canada complains about the War of 1812; Mexico and Latin American countries and Caribbean countries complain about American invasions or interference or colonialism; some Australians resent British rule etc.

But, rarely do English people demand reparations or sing “rebel songs” or complain about historical grievances. Why?

I could understand if maybe some English people resented Germany due to the two world balls or resented America for things like the Suez crisis and the funding of the IRA. And truth be told, I have come across some English people that are like that. But, they are very few compared to the other peoples I described.

I understand that this is sort of an academic question, but I wanted to come on this forum to ask ordinary English people how they felt and I hope you can give some honest answers rather than sarcastic responses or not answering the question properly.

The UK has been ruled for the last couple of hundred years by Northern Germans,.

It is somewhat ruled by Parliament, not the King.

"But, rarely do English people demand reparations or sing “rebel songs” or complain about historical grievances. Why?"

But there are rebel songs, just internal...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Rebel_Songs

Yes. I'm not discussing the constitution here. Parliament is definitely boss (which they made clearer when they imported the Germans to be heads of state).

Well quite. But that applies to a greater or lesser degree to many of the countries mentioned. Given Ireland’s been mentioned a lot, for example, despite being in the EU it was permitted to have a SEZ (special economic zone) and was able to build a world beating FS industry out of it, including low CT rates. Fair play, but living in modern Ireland is not only a history of oppression. Just as colonies - of whichever nation - were not only oppressed by their colonists. To pretend otherwise is damaging, probably not as much as to suggest that colonisation was only good but still inaccurate and divisive.

Im not saying that the unpleasant side of what the English/British/West has done should be minimised but I am suggesting that it is more complex, layered and interwoven than nasty English bad, poor whomever good.

Parliament is the key player. They invited the Dutch to a friendly takeover of England in 1688. No wonder we’re so placid

I don't think the Irish do think of their country in terms of oppression? There is that history, but most of the conversation now is around political issues that have little to do directly with the UK - immigration, political scandals, really complicated political shenanigans, women's rights. I don't think Irish people are just sitting about going "oh woe is me the English". Sometimes it's relevant - the issue of reuniting with NI and future feasibility thereof, the border issues caused by Brexit, conflicts elsewhere being compared to Ireland's independence struggle, English people making racist jokes.
I've lived abroad and never met an Irish person who was like "oh you're English, I hate you".** But of course they know their history.

**I met an American who was I think 1/8th Irish and it was a bit of a thing for them. But even then it was more "thus happened to my family" than hostility.

You may well be right. I was thinking in terms of an earlier poster who seemed adamant that Ireland had only ever had bad things happen to it.

But really it was an example - of how histories presented in wholly negative terms (as that poster was presenting Ireland) are rarely the full picture.

And yet people who are born here consider themselves and are considered English/Welsh/Scottish/Irish yet the royal family is somehow never granted that courtesy

If they want to be treated like everyone else then they should stop taking massive taxpayer handouts and start paying tax like everyone else.

i am not sure if it was actually an idea or whether it just happened. Volunteering booths/tables would be set up at local fairs and markets and the young men would go and sign up in groups. I agree that until the outcome of this was realised, no one thought to deliberately divide up the groups.
OMG I just googled and it was deliberate! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pals_battalion

The British royals are European more than German. They are related to all the European royals, Denmark figures quite heavily.

However they are British, just not 'English' as such, except those who married in.

Does it matter?

Kinda my point they are constantly referred to as German yet they are mostly born here and I have relatives overseas doesn't make me a migrant just means I have family overseas

Because “mustn’t grumble” is traditionally part of the national character as is a kind of pragmatic realism.

When the Romans came they brought hot baths straight roads and wine. We knew a good thing when we saw it and we quietly wiped off our woad and cut out wild hair.

Then, we had the Vikings. They were so wild and terrifying and Northern we kept our heads down and gave them half the country for a quiet life.

When the Normans came it wasn’t ideal, they took over everything, stole all our land, wiped out our culture and changed the official language to bloody French. But we had no choice but to crack on with it really. And they again had much better haircuts, no beards, and were very good at castles and embroidering tapestries, which the English have always liked. We had just been building wooden halls and weaving jute before that (very rough on the skin).

Since then no invasions - the Armada had a crack but Drake saw them off, Napoleon would have had a go but Nelson roasted him at Trafalgar and of course the RAF prevented Hitler getting the air supremacy he would have needed.

So from about 1700 to relatively recently we were Top Nation so we didn’t resent anyone we were too busy conquering or colonising them.

Of course now we are no longer Top
Nation we are starting to show we can be just as resentful as anyone else. See: Reform Uk and also Bell Hotel Epping.

Perhaps because these new “invaders” are not bringing wine roads and hot baths nor are they much harder and fiercer than us, we feel like we can have a go.

When the Romans left you had the Vikings? Aren't you missing another invasion...the Anglo-Saxons aka English.

I'm just as bad . I forgot the Jutes. Let's hear it for the Jutes!

This timeline misses out the Danes entirely, who ruled at least half of England in the 800s. It also leaves out the House of Hanover invasion which brought the Georgian kings, Bonnie Prince Charlie's invasion of 1745, his father's invasion of 1715 and the soft invasion of being taken over by William of Orange, a Dutch king we borrowed. All of which is conveniently left out of the "1,000 years of unbroken succession" BBC narrative.

Just because certain groups of people like to utilise the term 'Anglo Saxon' doesn't mean that Anglo-Saxons=English