The strong tradition of support for, and enthusiasm for forming, civil society/third-sector organizations (what the french call société associative) would be near top of the list for me, I think.

Thanks Ven. You mean rather than relying on the state to change things for the better?

Though, given that there are roughly 200,000 registered charities in the UK, could it be said that this approach can make us less effective campaigners?

Just off the top of my head, a general attitude of irreverence/skepticism towards leaders or people in positions of power (in contrast, say, to the attitude in the States which seems to be more aspirational). A sense of irony or satire? (I’m thinking of Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal, though there are probably more recent examples - Mark Thomas, maybe?)

Yes, not waiting to rely on the state - or the church, either. And the associated respect for the amateur and the enthuisast, as opposed to. the professional appointee

That, a lack of fatalism (and associated distrust of ideology or utopias), and a sense that, actual, realistic pragmatic achievements are possible.

That, and the whole legacy of running a big empire - the arrogance to get things done.

Sorry Ben, but there seems to be an assumption that Britain *is* good at campaigning here…

Which I gotta say is hopelessly optimistic.

You’re talking about the one nation in the western world to have had a continuous regime since The Glorious Revolution of 1688, we’re absolutely terrible at forcing our government to change its mind. Wander over here for my opinion on British demos, compared to our mediterranean cousins we have no idea how to give the government a kicking, prefering a few hippy drummers on a demo to getting out the petrol bombs.

I’ve long thought about Britain’s lack of a history of popular dissent to rival the french.. So I describe our revolution thus:

“oi, Yorkie, have you heard what the governments been doing about the local coal works? I think we’re going to have to head south on this one”

“I think you’re right”

(6 hours trudging later)

“Ok, we’ve just passed Sheffield and it’s begun to really piss it down, I’m not saying we should give up on taking our pike’s to Parliament, but shall we take a break for a pint?”

Brits, good at dissent? I think not.

Thanks all. Seems to me that we’re good at campaigning for lots of smaller issues, and pisspoor at revolution. Edwin, don’t forget the peasants’ revolt. “Hello your Maj, we’re peasants and we’re revolting.” “I say, so you are. Look, do you mind awfully going home?” “Oh, fair game your Maj. Thanks for listening. We’ll be off now.” “Topping. Of course, I’ll have to execute one or two of you. I wouldn’t like to think you came all this way for nothing.” “Your Maj, you think of everything. We’re all jolly glad you’re going to carry on being King after all.”

Not, pedantically, that the title “Majesty” was used till quite a lot later…

Definitely agree with Edwin on this one,do we have anyone such as Jose Bove and his crew who were prepared to do something about Mc Donalds?I don’t think so.Regards,Mick.

Well, there was the McLibel trial, but - yeah - fair point, they were only handing out leaflets at the outset. Hats off to them for digging in their heels afterwards, though.

Hmmm, well I am extremely sceptical that the British are good at campaigning about things (moaning is a different thing) but I would say that the lack of grandstanding twats like Bove is one of the reasons why we can get things done. So he trashed a McDonalds? So what? The French still eat far more of the things than anyone does on this side of the La Manche.

More broadly, I’d say the lack of revolutions isn’t in itself a sign of passivity. For the last two hundred years the French have been taking to the streets and have tried Five Republics, Two Empires and dithered with the house of Bourbon and, you know what, Britain and France aren’t all that different.

On most issues the understated, pragmatic streak of the British character tends to be more effective than throwing a public tantrum.

Mass protests tend to work best as showing people are pissed off about something and forestalling change – this applies to Britain (Poll Tax demos, for instance) and France (pretty much everything) equally. To effect positive change you’ve got to be able to focus your efforts and change the authorities’ collective minds. It might be the British sentimentality about animals, but anti-cruelty campaigners seem a good example of this.

That’s a bit more like it, Dornan. So, we’re crap at campaigning but - unlike the French - we actually get stuff done, and effect change.

Sounds like we’re not all that bad after all.

I think some of you, though, are confusing campaigning with protest - they overlap but aren’t interchangeable.

No, we *can* get things done, with less effort than the French, and there are examples of us campaigning effectively. But I am yet to convinced that we’re “good at campaigning”.

Eg England’s football team can, usually, beat Wales. Does that make them “good at football”?

It does occur to me that perhaps the country’s rulers have always been astute in not pushing things too far. If, for example, tonight’s suggestion that Gordon Brown is backing away from the ID card plan, that might be confirmation of that. The campaign against ID cards, however, has been pretty ineffective.

… is backing away from the ID card plan is confirmed…