blimey - lots more wisdom there. I'd like to have a pint with you sometime, lox.

I think my point about Ron's statement earlier is that sometimes, maybe it's okay to say "It's just a symbol." Sometimes maybe a symbol can become so sullied by its associations that it's impossible to reclaim, and the most positive thing is to let it go and to focus on the stuff that really matters. You make a valid point about the swastika in Leicester, but would I feel comfortable as a white person having it on my door? Would, say, a German person feel comfortable trying to re-claim that symbol?

I'm not actually saying that this is how I feel about the flag of St George. In fact, to me the widespread use of the flag of St George is a relatively recent phenomenon, possibly dating from the Euro 96 tournament which was played in England, complete with THAT song. Do you remember when the George's Cross suddenly appeared in those little flag holders on cars and in people's windows? it was actually the Union Jack that was dragged through the mud by the hooligans and skinheads on the 80s - my take is that the promotion of the English flag was a direct response to that, an acknowledgement that the Union Jack was not really redeemable, at least not at that time, but that the flag of St George might offer a more positive symbol of English identity. Of course, since then the BNP has tried to co-opt the St George's Cross too, but I don't think it has anything like the pejorative connotations that the Union Jack did.

But symbols will always change their meaning, won't they? So long as people and societies themselves change. The symbols we choose as emblems are surely no more fixed than we are.