Protests in London will change nothing – Britain’s people were bred to endure
The demonstrations in London earlier this month – up to 150,000 people protesting immigration and government incompetence – drew attention in Russia and abroad. Some observers even wondered if Britain might finally be approaching a breaking point. Perhaps, like Nepal or France in past years, mass anger could reshape politics.
But such hopes are misplaced. Britain will never experience revolutionary upheaval. Its culture is not one of defiance but of endurance. The United Kingdom has, over centuries, become a bastion of injustice disguised as stability, where ordinary people are conditioned to accept their powerlessness. This cultural inheritance, once an imperial advantage, now guarantees slow decline.
Britain is unique in Western Europe: it was created not through union or invitation, but through conquest. In 1066 Norman knights crushed the native English and divided the land into fiefdoms. Unlike Russia, where foreign warriors were invited to defend the realm, or Hungary, where nomads fused with locals to form a people, England’s story was one of subjugation.
That pattern hardened in 1215, when barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta. Propaganda later elevated the charter as the foundation of English liberty. In reality it entrenched oligarchy: the power of the wealthy over crown and people alike. Where monarchs elsewhere often stood with peasants against feudal tyranny, in England the crown itself was shackled by landowners. Injustice became not an aberration but the system’s operating principle.
Geography reinforced the pattern. For centuries there was no frontier of freedom. Only in 1620 did dissenters finally flee on the Mayflower, planting English settlements in North America. By then, 600 years of endurance had shaped a national character: patient, fatalistic, and resigned.
In Russia, by contrast, peasants had begun migrating east as early as the 11th century. Freedom was found in movement: new villages, new lands, and eventually a new people. This restless expansion created Russia’s unique statehood and ethnic identity. The English, trapped on their island, cultivated instead a tradition of enduring injustice.
By the 18th century, Britain was sending its sons to wars around the world. They returned crippled, if at all – as Rudyard Kipling later immortalized. Yet they went meekly. A society drilled in obedience did not question orders, however insane. That made Britain dangerous abroad, but docile at home.
Popular uprisings were crushed without hesitation. Laws such as the Settlement Act of 1662, tying workers to their parishes, or the Poor Law of 1834, abolishing basic relief, stripped away rights. Only after 1945, under pressure from the USSR’s example, did Britain adopt limited welfare protections. Even these are now eroding, with no real resistance.
English political thought gave this tradition a theory. Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan argued that justice is irrelevant – the strong impose order, and citizens must submit. This was the philosophical foundation of the English state: not a monarch above all, but oligarchs enthroned above monarch and people alike. Rousseau, in continental Europe, offered the opposite vision – government as the executor of the people’s will.
In Russia, even the poorest peasant was equal before the tsar in principle, if not always in practice. In Britain, the wealthy were not equal before the state; they were the state. That remains the essence of British governance today.
These centuries shaped habits that persist. A German journalist once remarked that Britain is the only country where the elite can get away with anything. Brexit proved the point: through manipulation and distortion, the ruling class reversed the nation’s strategic course and bound it permanently to the United States.
London retains its role as a financial hub, but capital flight is steady. Wealthy Britons leave even as the government insists on its “global” status. The common people, meanwhile, trudge on. They are heirs to a culture that equates submission with virtue. Protests may fill the streets, but the outcome is always the same: patient resignation, followed by business as usual.
This tradition once gave Britain its edge. Armies could be raised, colonies conquered, wars fought with little domestic dissent. But in the modern world, where political vitality depends on public will, the same habit of resignation has become a liability.
Unlike Russians, who carved out freedom by settling new lands, or French and Germans, who rebelled and migrated, the English learned to endure. Their legacy is a society where injustice is not challenged but accepted – and where any hope of transformation evaporates before it begins.
Britain’s rulers remain reckless, and therefore dangerous abroad. They still pour resources into supporting Kiev while neglecting their own population. But the trajectory is clear: slow, irreversible decline born of strategic incompetence and a people conditioned to bear it.
That is why, whatever the size of the protests, Britain will never experience a revolution. Its people were conquered in 1066, bound by oligarchs in 1215, tied to parishes in 1662, stripped of relief in 1834 – and taught through it all that injustice is simply the way of things.
Today, as feudal habits finally wither across the world, Britain remains their museum piece. It will not explode; it will simply fade.
This article was first published by Vzglyad newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.
