What is Excluded Unity? A Guide for the UK

This post may contain affiliate links. If you make a purchase through these links, we may earn a commission at no additional cost to you.

Have you ever been in a crowd and felt it? That buzz. That electric feeling of belonging. Maybe it was at a football match, the roar of thousands of fans becoming one voice. Perhaps it was during a street party for a royal wedding, a sea of Union Jacks waving in perfect sync. It’s a powerful feeling, the sense that you’re part of something bigger than yourself. A proper tribe.

But what if that feeling comes at a cost? What if the warmth of belonging is only possible because someone else has been left out in the cold?

This is the core of a powerful, often invisible, force that has shaped Britain for centuries: Excluded Unity. It’s a simple but unsettling idea: we often build our strongest bonds not just on what we share, but on who we are not. It’s the ‘members-only’ jacket, the private joke, the shared enemy. It’s the invisible wall that makes an ‘us’ feel special by creating a ‘them’.

From the Roman invaders who first drew a line on the map, to the heated debates over Brexit, this concept is woven into the very fabric of our national story. It’s not some dusty old theory; it’s in our politics, our playgrounds, our passions, and even our own hearts. Understanding it is key to understanding the deep currents of division and connection that make Britain what it is today. This article will explore that powerful idea, breaking down where it comes from, how it works, and the profound impact it has on us all.

What Exactly Is Excluded Unity? The Members-Only Club Mentality

So, what are we really talking about? Let’s break it down. Think of it like a secret treehouse.

A Simple Explanation: The Treehouse Club

Imagine you and your mates build a treehouse. You create a secret password and a list of rules. The fun isn’t just about having a cool place to hang out; a huge part of the buzz comes from the fact that not everyone is allowed in. Your little brother and his friends? They’re out. That’s what makes your club special. You’ve created a tight-knit group—a unity—by excluding others. That’s Excluded Unity in a nutshell. It’s unity built on a boundary.

A Deeper Dive: The Psychology of In-Groups and Out-Groups

This isn’t just playground politics. It’s a fundamental part of human psychology. In the 1970s, a social psychologist named Henri Tajfel came up with something called Social Identity Theory. It sounds complicated, but the idea is simple.

We all want to feel good about ourselves. One of the main ways we do this is by belonging to groups. Tajfel called these our ‘in-groups’. Your in-group could be your family, your favourite football team (say, Manchester United), the company you work for, or even your nationality (being British).

To make our group feel special, our brains naturally do two things:

We talk up the good things about our own group (“United have the best history and the most loyal fans”).
We exaggerate the differences and flaws of other groups, who become the ‘out-group’ (“Liverpool fans are all deluded,” or “City have no real history”).

This process creates a powerful sense of loyalty and togetherness within the in-group. We feel a sense of pride and self-esteem from our group’s successes. But this unity is a double-edged sword. It’s often forged in opposition to an out-group. The stronger the rivalry, the stronger the bond. We define ourselves by who we are not.

This mental shortcut is incredibly useful for politicians, advertisers, and leaders who want to rally people. By pointing to a ‘them’—an out-group to blame or compete against—they can create a powerful and immediate sense of ‘us’.

A History of ‘Us and Them’ in Britain

The story of Britain is, in many ways, a story of Excluded Unity. Different groups have been cast as the ‘out-group’ at different times, helping to forge a new sense of what it meant to be ‘British’ for those on the inside.

From Romans to the Reformation: Drawing the First Lines

It started early. The Romans built Hadrian’s Wall not just to keep the ‘barbarian’ Picts out, but also to define the northern boundary of their civilised world. It was a physical line that said: “We are Roman. They are not.”

Centuries later, the Norman Conquest of 1066 was another defining moment. A French-speaking elite took over, establishing themselves as the new in-group. For generations, to be powerful and noble was to be Norman, while the Anglo-Saxons were the excluded, resentful out-group. Over time, these groups merged, but the pattern was set.

Then came the Reformation in the 16th century. When Henry VIII broke from the Catholic Church, being English suddenly became tied to being Protestant. Catholics became the new internal ‘enemy’. Laws were passed against them, they were barred from power, and a new English unity was forged in opposition to Rome. This suspicion of Catholics would linger for centuries, shaping our relationship with European neighbours like Spain and France.

Forging an Empire: Unity Through Domination

The British Empire was perhaps the grandest and most brutal example of Excluded Unity. How do you unite England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland under one banner? One way is to give them a shared project and a shared sense of superiority.

The unity of being ‘British’ was built on the idea that we were bringing civilisation, commerce, and Christianity to the ‘uncivilised’ world. The people of Africa, India, and the Caribbean were cast as the ultimate out-group: racially inferior, culturally backward, and in need of our guidance.

Case Study: The ‘Civilising Mission’
- Victorian books, newspapers, and even adverts were filled with images of heroic British soldiers and officials standing over grateful or rebellious ‘natives’.
- This created a powerful in-group identity back home. A factory worker in Manchester and a wealthy landowner in Kent might have had little in common, but they could both feel a shared pride in being part of an empire that ruled the waves.
- This unity, however, was entirely dependent on the exclusion and subjugation of millions of people. It was a unity for the rulers, not the ruled.

Post-War Britain and the Windrush Betrayal

After the Second World War, Britain was broken and needed rebuilding. A call went out across the Commonwealth for workers to come and help. Hundreds of thousands answered, including the ‘Windrush generation’ from the Caribbean, who arrived from 1948 onwards.

They had been taught they were British citizens, part of the imperial family. They arrived believing they were part of the ‘in-group’. The reality was a harsh shock.

They faced widespread racism, were denied housing, and were treated as an out-group by many. The signs that read “No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish” were a blatant declaration of Excluded Unity. While some Britons welcomed the newcomers, a significant portion of the white working class, feeling their own identity and security were threatened, pushed back.

A new form of British unity for some was being forged by excluding these new arrivals. This tension has never fully gone away, culminating in the shameful Windrush scandal, where people who had lived and worked in Britain for decades were wrongly classified as illegal immigrants.

Thatcher’s Britain and the ‘Enemy Within’

Fast forward to the 1980s. Britain was a country in turmoil, facing economic decline and industrial unrest. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had a bold vision for a new Britain, one based on free markets, individualism, and breaking the power of the trade unions.

To achieve this, her government needed to unite a part of the country behind her vision. And to do that, it needed an enemy.

Case Study: The 1984-85 Miners’ Strike
- The miners were one of the most powerful and organised groups of workers in Britain. For Thatcher, they represented everything she wanted to sweep away: old industry, collective power, and opposition to her plans.
- She famously branded them the “enemy within.” This was a masterstroke of Excluded Unity. It framed the striking miners not as fellow Britons fighting for their jobs and communities, but as a dangerous out-group threatening the nation’s survival.
- The year-long strike was bitter and violent. It tore communities apart, but it achieved its political goal. The miners were defeated, and a new unity was forged among Thatcher’s supporters—a coalition of southern homeowners, financiers, and aspirational workers who believed the unions had been holding Britain back.
- For the mining communities, the exclusion was absolute. They were left behind, their pits closed and their way of life destroyed. The unity of the new, modern Britain was built on their defeat.

How Excluded Unity Shapes Modern Britain

This pattern of creating an ‘us’ by defining a ‘them’ didn’t end in the 1980s. It is arguably more powerful than ever in the 21st century, shaping our politics, our culture, and our society.

The Class System: The Original Divide

Britain’s class system is perhaps the oldest and most stubborn form of Excluded Unity. It’s less about how much money you have and more about your background, your accent, your education, and your manners.

In-Groups and Out-Groups: The old aristocracy, the new super-rich, the middle classes, the working classes—each group has its own codes and signals. Unity within these groups is often quietly reinforced by looking down on or simply not understanding the others.
Education as a Sorter: Elite institutions like Eton and Oxbridge have historically acted as gatekeepers to the ruling in-group. Getting in doesn’t just give you a good education; it stamps your passport for entry into the circles of power.
The ‘Metropolitan Elite’ vs. ‘The Real People’: In modern politics, you often hear talk of the “London bubble” or the “metropolitan elite.” This is classic Excluded Unity language. It creates an in-group of “hard-working, common-sense people” from the provinces and an out-group of “out-of-touch Londoners” who don’t understand their lives.

Sectarianism: A Localised Intensity

In some parts of the UK, Excluded Unity takes on a fierce, local, and often religious flavour. The most famous examples are in Glasgow and Northern Ireland.

The Old Firm: The football rivalry between Glasgow’s Celtic (historically supported by the Catholic community of Irish descent) and Rangers (historically supported by the Protestant unionist community) is more than just a game. For many, it’s a core part of their identity. The powerful unity of being a Rangers fan is defined in opposition to being a Celtic fan, and vice versa. It’s a tribal identity that encompasses religion, politics, and history.
The Troubles: In Northern Ireland, this dynamic played out with tragic consequences for decades. The unity of the Loyalist/Unionist community (who see themselves as British) was built on excluding the Nationalist/Republican community (who aspire to a united Ireland), and vice versa. Each side had its own flags, heroes, and histories, and the sense of belonging within each group was intensified by the conflict with the other.

The Brexit Referendum: A Nation Divided

The 2016 Brexit referendum was arguably the single biggest act of Excluded Unity in modern British history. It split the country down the middle and showed just how powerful ‘us vs. them’ politics can be.

The ‘Leave’ campaign, in particular, was incredibly effective at creating an in-group and a clear out-group.

The In-Group: The campaign spoke to a sense of English and, to a lesser extent, British identity that felt left behind. The in-group were the “real people” who wanted to “take back control” from an unelected, faceless power. They felt their traditions, sovereignty, and way of life were under threat.
The Out-Groups: There were several:
1. The EU: Brussels bureaucrats were painted as the primary enemy—unelected officials making laws for Britain without our consent.
2. Immigrants: Concerns about immigration, particularly from Eastern Europe, were central. The message was that immigrants were taking jobs, putting pressure on public services, and changing the culture.
3. The Establishment: The ‘out-group’ also included the so-called ‘metropolitan elite’—politicians, big business leaders, academics, and experts who were accused of benefiting from the EU and ignoring the concerns of ordinary people.

By defining these clear enemies, the Leave campaign created a powerful and passionate sense of unity among its supporters. They weren’t just voting on trade policy; they were fighting for their identity against forces that seemed to be eroding it. The result was a narrow victory that has left the country deeply divided, proving that while Excluded Unity is brilliant at winning battles, it can leave deep and lasting wounds in a society.

How to Spot Excluded Unity in the Wild

Once you know what you’re looking for, you’ll start seeing this dynamic everywhere. Here’s a quick checklist for spotting it in action.

1. Look for ‘Us vs. Them’ Language

This is the biggest giveaway. Listen for phrases that create a clear division between two groups.

“The people vs. the elite”
“Hard-working families vs. scroungers”
“Patriots vs. the ‘woke’ brigade”
“Our country vs. foreign powers”

This language is designed to make you pick a side and feel a sense of solidarity with your chosen tribe.

2. Identify the Scapegoat

Excluded Unity nearly always involves scapegoating. This is when a person or group (the out-group) is unfairly blamed for complex problems. It’s easier to blame immigrants for pressure on the NHS than to have a difficult conversation about chronic underfunding and mismanagement. It’s simpler to blame ‘lazy people’ for poverty than to address systemic economic issues.

Who is being blamed for society’s problems? That group is the designated ‘them’.

3. Notice When Identity Is Defined by Opposition

Pay attention when a group’s identity seems to be more about what it hates than what it loves. A political movement that spends all its time attacking its opponents, but has few positive ideas of its own, is likely using Excluded Unity. A national identity that is based purely on being “not European” or “not American” is a fragile one.

4. Question the Call for a ‘Single Voice’

Be wary when leaders demand that everyone fall in line and speak with a single, unified voice. True, inclusive unity has room for disagreement and debate. A call to crush dissent and present a totally united front is often a sign that an out-group is about to be, or is already being, created. The people who disagree are the new ‘them’.

The Future: Can We Build a More Inclusive Unity?

The big question is, are we stuck with this? Is Excluded Unity just a permanent feature of human society?

The rise of social media has certainly made it worse in some ways. Algorithms create echo chambers, where we only hear from people who already agree with us, reinforcing our in-group identity. It becomes easier than ever to see the out-group not just as people we disagree with, but as stupid, evil, or less than human.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. The opposite of Excluded Unity is Inclusive Unity. This is a much harder, but ultimately much stronger, form of belonging.

Inclusive Unity is based on shared values, not a shared enemy. It celebrates diversity and recognises that you can have a strong, unified identity without needing someone to look down on.
It finds unity in things like a shared commitment to fairness, a belief in democracy, respect for the law, or a love for a particular place.
It accepts that people can disagree and still be part of the same team. You can support different football teams, vote for different parties, and have different faiths, but still feel a sense of shared Britishness.

Building this kind of unity is slow and difficult. It requires empathy—the ability to put ourselves in the shoes of people who are different from us. It requires us to listen more than we shout. And it requires leaders who are willing to bring people together rather than tear them apart for political gain.

Ultimately, the choice is ours. Excluded Unity is easy. It’s a cheap and powerful trick for creating a sense of belonging. But it’s a unity that is fragile, bitter, and always leaves someone out. An inclusive unity is harder to build, but it’s the only kind that can truly bring a diverse and complex country like Britain together. The story of our future will be written by which path we choose.

The Great British Divide: Understanding Excluded Unity and the Power of ‘Us vs. Them’