AN AMERICAN friend of my family’s, an academic, was once asked by my parents about the many US flags on display on his street in a small provincial town. They varied dramatically in size: was that significant in some way? “Yes,” he answered, “it tells you a lot: the bigger the flag, the emptier the head.”

Needless to say, he did not have a flagpole in his yard.

Liberals don’t like nationalism. They regard it as distasteful at best, downright nasty at worst. Politicians of the left, particularly in Britain, come over all nauseous during overt displays of national pride.

But the problem, as many now realise, is that unless you are prepared to engage with questions of national identity, then you leave a vacuum that others will fill. Tories and Faragists have reaped the rewards of being seen to take pride in their country. Is the left simply going to leave them to it?

Many of us dislike nationalism instinctively. A fundamental part of it is the belief that there is something special about to your nation. Usually that transmutes into “something better”. Characteristics are ascribed to the nation and its people which, seen through a narrow lens, might seem unique, but seen from a broader perspective are anything but. Cultural differences are often far more superficial than they seem: at heart, human beings tend to want the same things whether they live in Sudan, Syria or downtown Glasgow: to provide for themselves and their loved ones; to live in peace; and to have the freedom and opportunity to pursue their dreams.

READ MORE REBECCA McQUILLAN: UK should follow Scots example

But what I have come to realise is that a sense of national identity is so widespread – perhaps almost universal – that it cannot simply be wished away. Call it a sense of community, or a tribal instinct, but most people do identify with their nation at least to some extent, and many (though certainly not all) feel pride in it. Politicians of the left therefore have a choice: they can leave national identity for the right to define and exploit, or they can try and shape it themselves.

Labour are wrestling with this question as part of their post-Corbyn existential crisis. A presentation by the party’s head of research leaked last week floated the idea that Labour use the Union flag, veterans and “dressing smartly” at war memorials in a bid to show respect for Britain, to win over disillusioned voters in former Red Wall seats.

Predictably, the idea has been condemned by many inside the party, including MP Clive Lewis, a former soldier, who has interpreted the move as Labour “absorbing the language and symbols of the Tory party”.

I tend to agree, particularly on the use of the flag, which is crude and ill-thought-through. For now at least, in the wake of Boris Johnson’s landslide and our exit from the EU, the Union flag is associated with bolshie, bombastic, anti-European sentiment. Labour using it tactically to curry favour in the north of England would be both cynical and fraught with risk.

The Herald:

And there are other obvious problems that leap out at you like a George’s Cross on a Yes march, particularly that Labour flying the flag is liable to turn off Scots and young voters.

Forget the flag, would be my advice, or at least use it sparingly. But that doesn’t mean Labour should simply concede the ground. Their ambition should be to challenge the off-putting ethos that has built up in recent years around British nationalist sentiment.

If Labour want to see what’s possible for a centre left party that’s bold enough to try and shape national identity, they need only look at the SNP. What the SNP have achieved with their outward-looking, inclusive messaging – their so-called civic nationalism – is to create a mildly lefty form of nationalism which is quite distinct from the more traditional jingoistic, backward-looking pro-Brexit version.

You can overstate this, of course, since there are parallels between the two, most obviously the way both involve galvanising supporters against a perceived antagonist – Westminster in one case, Brussels in the other.

And the wider Yes movement, like all nationalist campaigns, has bigots on the fringes.

But there are still lessons here for Labour – not that it should become a nationalist party, but that it need not accept the prevailing ethos of Britishness.

There is nothing unique about Scotland that means the inclusive approach would only work here. English nationalism is often perceived as angry and racist but that is not the whole story; as nationalism expert Michael Kenny of Cambridge University notes, it has also been associated with commitment to democracy, rights and popular sovereignty.

Both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown tried to define British national identity. New Labour came to power on a wave of optimism, to a Britpop soundtrack (remember Noel Gallagher’s Union Jack guitar?). Tolerance, said Mr Blair, was “what makes Britain”.

READ MORE REBECCA McQUILLAN: The F word can save UK

Gordon Brown praised the idea of a day of national celebration akin to July 4th or Bastille Day and called for Labour supporters to be unashamedly patriotic about a Britain that stood for liberty, fairness and personal responsibility.

But neither caught fire and then along came Jeremy Corbyn who seemed equivocal in his commitment to his country.

Now Keir Starmer is trying to rebuild Labour’s credibility. What he must not do is swallow a version of British national identity that’s been shaped by Ukip and the right. He needs to recognise that redefining it in a lasting way is the project of a generation. His mission should be to articulate a version of Britain that reflects the more honourable aspects of the national story, such as commitment to democracy, fairness, tolerance, respect for the rule of law and openness to the outside world, (some of which, admittedly, have felt under attack at times since 2016). He can make it his mission to stand up for the fabled British sense of fair play by tackling the inequality that blights the nation.

The US experience should give us hope. Donald Trump co-opted American patriotism, but the Democrats have wrested it back from him following the Capitol riots, reaffirming that true patriots uphold democracy and constitutional rights.

The British left for their part can leave national pride to the Tories or they can engage.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.