This book provides a comprehensive analysis of the opponents of Britain’s first attempt to join the European Economic Community (EEC), between the announcement of Harold Macmillan’s new policy initiative in July 1961 and General de Gaulle’s veto of Britain’s application for membership in January 1963. In particular, this study examines the role of national identity in shaping both the formulation and articulation of arguments put forward by these opponents of Britain’s policy. To date, studies of Britain’s unsuccessful bid for entry have focused on high political analysis of diplomacy and policy formulation. In most accounts, only passing reference is made to domestic opposition. This book redresses the balance by providing a more complete depiction of the opposition movement and a distinctive approach that proceeds from a ‘low political’ viewpoint. As such, the book emphasises protest and populism of the kind exercised by, among others, Fleet Street crusaders at the Daily Express, pressure groups such as the Anti-Common Market League and Forward Britain Movement, expert pundits like A. J. P. Taylor, Sir Arthur Bryant and William Pickles, as well as constituency activists, independent parliamentary candidates, pamphleteers, letter writers and maverick MPs. In its consideration of a group largely overlooked in previous accounts, the book provides essential insights into the intellectual, structural, populist and nationalist dimensions of early Euroscepticism. The book will be of significant interest to both scholars and students of national identity, Britain’s relationship with Europe and the Commonwealth, pressure groups and party politics, and the trajectory of the Eurosceptic phenomenon.

Robert Dewey provides a comprehensive examination of the forces that aligned against Britain's first attempts to join Europe 1961-63.

This study patterns national identity over a number of important historical milestones and brings the debates over Europe up-to-date with an analysis of recent happenings including the referendum on Scottish independence, the global economic crisis and the current crisis in Syria.

Amid the ongoing Brexit crisis, both sides are appealing to Britain's past relationship with Europe to justify their positions. But much specious history is presented to argue for either the closeness or distance of our political, cultural and economic links with 'the Continent'. We urgently need a dispassionate account of how Britain's history truly fits into a European context. How similar has Britain been to other European countries, and in what respects? Do Brits feel European, and have they taken an interest in events on the Continent, or has their distance from Europe led to insularity and xenophobia? Finally, how involved in European affairs has Britain been over the last several hundred years? Jeremy Black's fresh and trenchant analysis sets an increasingly politicised British history in its real European context.

Britain's vote to leave the European Union in the summer of 2016 came as a shock to many observers. But writers had long been exploring anxieties and fractures in British society – from Euroscepticism, to immigration, to devolution, to post-truth narratives – that came to the fore in the Brexit campaign and its aftermath. Reading these tensions back into contemporary British writing, Kristian Shaw coins the term Brexlit to deliver the first in-depth study of how writers engaged with these issues before and after the referendum result. Examining the work of over a hundred British authors, including Julian Barnes, Jonathan Coe, Kazuo Ishiguro, and Ali Smith, as well as popular fiction by Andrew Marr and Stanley Johnson, Brexlit explores how a new and urgent genre of post-Brexit fiction is beginning to emerge.

This book offers an original interpretation of Britain’s relationship with Europe over a 25 year period: 1959-84 and advances the argument that the current problems over EU membership resulted from much earlier political machinations. This evidence based account of the seminal period analyses the applications for EEC membership, the 1975 referendum, and the role of the press. Was the British public misled over the true aims of the European project? How significant was the role of the press in changing public opinion from anti, to pro Common Market membership? Why, after over 40 years since Britain became a member of the European community, does the issue continue to deeply divide not only the political elite, but also the British public? These, and other pertinent questions are answered in this timely book on a subject that remains topical and highly controversial.

This is the first book to examine the relationship between English nationalism, Brexit and ‘the Anglosphere’ – a politically-contested term used to denote English-speaking countries sharing cultural and historical roots with the UK. In the aftermath of the UK’s EU referendum some pointed to a ‘revolt’ of those ‘left behind’ by globalisation. Ben Wellings argues instead that Brexit was and is an elite project, firmly situated within the tradition of an expansive English nationalism. Far from being parochial ‘Little Englanders’, elite Brexiteers sought to replace the European Union with trade and security alliances between ‘true friends’ and ‘traditional allies’ in the Anglosphere. Brexit was thus reassuringly presented as a giant leap into the known. As the UK’s future relationship with the rest of the world is negotiated, the need to understand this ‘English moment’ has never been more pressing.