Resetting British Culture.

 

Introduction

Rioting is nothing new on Britain's streets; many have experienced the violent clashes in Notting Hill in 1958, a racially motivated series of riots between white British residents and newly arrived Afro-Caribbean immigrants, the 1991 Tottenham riots, sparked by the death of a black man in police custody, and others over the years. But this time, the recent riots have a different context and underlying causes.

What started as a protest against the murder of three little girls in Southport has swept the country for days, fuelled by the spread of misinformation on social media. The cause of the anger is sharply contested. For some, they are racist far-right agitators, and opportunist thugs whipped up by populist politicians and commentators. For others, they represent a more profound unease about successive immigration and social policies, which have left people feeling ignored, marginalised, and even despised by politicians and mainstream media. The ideological divide is between those who see 'diversity as strength', believing that a diverse society is stronger and more resilient, and those who think unlimited tolerance breeds its own intolerance, arguing that excessive tolerance can lead to the acceptance of intolerant views. For all the images of burning cars, racist graffiti and violent looting, there is another side to the story: those who help in the clean-up, who show solidarity with their Muslim neighbours, and who make clear their opposition to racist hatred.

One of the vital issues in the cause of the riots is that many of those taking part are working class who feel they are the ones who are paying a heavy price for immigration. Successive governments have stopped listening to their grievances, and peaceful demonstrations are not doing it and giving unfair advantages, for instance, in housing and welfare, while the working class see the deprivation of their neighbourhood deteriorating. These grievances and concerns were often mistaken for racist views and ignored. Successive governments for the last twenty years have stopped listening to a series of peaceful demonstrations. Economic problems, lower living standards, and the pressure on their spending have exacerbated their frustrations.

Broken borders, illegal migrants, £1.2 million costing £8 to £10 million a day, a policy people did not vote for. The government must urgently organise national, rational debates and follow up by slowing immigration to a manageable level so infrastructure can reach an adequate level and provide reasonable services. Amid mounting fears of violent Islamic extremism, many in Britain, as in Europe, ask whether Muslim immigrants can integrate into historically Christian countries. Indeed, more effort is needed, even to the point of resetting British Culture.  It is argued, therefore, that both British Muslims and non-Muslim British must share responsibility to speed up the progress of Muslim integration and build a cohesive Britain.

What is culture?

                                                                           

There is a rumour that, during the first couple of days after the riots began in Liverpool, a group of young lads draped in the flag of St George set up a roadblock. They stopped drivers to ask them, "Are you English?" and one of the drivers replied, "No, I am British," and another said I am not English; I am from Yorkshire". Little did the young lad realise that the question he asked was an age-old question that had played on the minds of the English with their identity for centuries. The English identify only by what they are not; otherwise, they don't need an identity since they are the majority. The English are not Scottish, Welsh, or Irish. They are neither Norman nor Saxon. An English identity is a myth, an imagined identity, and that is as far it goes with Nationalism in Britain. Yet the resilience of British identity, rooted in its diversity and adaptability, remains reassuring.

The mix of early Danes and Germanic peoples with indigenous peoples as early as the fourth century created a diverse society. The Norman invaders of 1066, bringing in their baggage of over ten thousand French words, failed to overcome the unique trait of an already diverse people. The invaders became the invaded. And so it is today. Immigrants to this green and pleasant land call it home and join in what has become British culture. Their contributions, stretching their natural inherited limits and blending their nature to join this rich, diverse cultural community, have enriched British culture. They are the ones who have allowed us to achieve an equilibrium in a pluralistic society that energises a happy life under the umbrella of the British sense of culture, tolerance, fair play, and legal systems, values embedded in British history and heritage.

So, from this introduction, I can say that immigration is nothing new. The attempt to divide this status quo is very much so. In simple terms, my ideas are taken from a personal point of view. When I first came to this country in 1958, I was one of the few, part of an immigration trickle that had started soon after 1945. Drop ink in a large bucket of water, and it would quickly dissipate, as I and thousands of others like me have done. Especially within the last ten years, specifically after Brexit, the trickle became a whole bottle of ink thrown in at once in that same bucket of water. The 'flow became a flood', which was a rapid increase in the immigrant population. This rapid increase has, by and large, resulted in clusters of communities, which naturally breed identity politics as each community tends to protect its cultural distinctiveness—resulting in a pluralistic society of parallel lives and remaining happy with that difference.

Immigration

Such communitarian direction comes at the cost of traditional British dominant culture. Pluralism can be achieved, but not at the expense of losing British values. Mutual respect underpins tolerance, the rule of law, democracy, reasonableness, and individual liberty. An understanding of overlapping consensus, as in Rawls's theory of Justice as Fairness, helps explain this. Those who cannot accept this feel helpless and socially deprived. Joining the new Reform Party offers refuge, and they see its policies as a likely answer to their grievances.

Many believe the cumulative growth of immigration is reaching a critical point, giving ammunition to those who say it is out of control. An increase of 750,000 last year and a projected six million more by 2035, double the present population of Wales, is a significant strain on an already beleaguered health service. It's also putting pressure on inadequate housing infrastructure, overstretched schools, and other services. The urgency of this situation cannot be overstated. Others, however, argue that these services will collapse without immigrants working in them. The NHS, for instance, depends on immigrants beyond the hospital backup staff; we need to train more doctors and nurses.  Importing these Doctors and Nurses, often from poor countries that need them most, raises a fundamental moral question.  But I digress.  

Yet, cohesion is an agreed foundation on which society is built when different groups within a society can live side by side with mutual respect and tolerance. This is a lofty ideal but a practical necessity for a harmonious society. Some libertarians argue for open borders, emphasising the free movement of individuals as a fundamental principle of liberty. They believe individuals should have the right to move freely and seek opportunities. Many in Britain will support that view, and many others would defy this stand if it comes at the cost of the working class, mainly when immigrants are distributed in poor areas where services are overstretched, and housing accommodations are crumbling. Cultural distinctiveness becomes a marker of a heated atmosphere, displacing any would-be harmony that may have existed. One way or another, the dominant group must re-identify: "I may be poor, but I am—Somebody!"

The dominant group sees immigrants as protected by the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1998 Human Rights Act and a sea of solicitors ready to act on these pointers. What was supposed to be the dominant group resented the resulting invisibility and wanted public recognition of their inner worth. This collective identity, knowingly or unknowingly, leads to what we today label as modern identity politics. The country's current economic problems tend to exacerbate frustration, and scapegoating is often at hand. In culturally diverse societies, we can easily find patterns of state support for some cultural groups over others. Consequently, anxieties of the white working class refuse to endure such alienation. They shift to the Right to find refuge in populism and far-right, radical parties, where they are further manipulated towards racial differences, bringing racial hatred to the forefront. Headlines in newspapers, further fuelled by politicians, add to these temperaments.

Government policies right and wrong

The government has a legal duty to look after refugees but has no legal duty to look after their own. 
The distribution of refugees could be better directed. They are put in the poorest areas yet housed comfortably. At the same time, those of their own have to wait for eighteen months or more and even then are housed in poor conditions, often mouldy and overcrowded accommodation. The local people feel ignored and marginalised, even despised by the establishment. Mainstream media headlines these discrepancies and unfair advantages, adding fuel to an already volatile situation. The result is a divided, burgeoning, pluralist society. In such cases, it belies the idea that multiculturalism is enriching. In contrast, people experience a loss of privileges, as incoming rights are prioritised over those already in place, changing the nature of communities they never agreed to and eroding natural and traditional social cohesion.

Britain also attracts some of the world's most capable and highly qualified people, driving up our wealth-creating potential. National life is enriched culturally and socially. Bringing in cheap nurses and doctors from abroad, often from poorer countries, and depriving their local populations of badly needed care, invites criticism that this policy hinges on the moral question of self-interest. 

That aside, bringing these people ironically stokes the fires even more. Nurses and doctors, whom we can not do without, need their families with them, yet more immigrants are needed, which exacerbates the problem of community cohesion and adds pressure on an already beleaguered infrastructure in its present form. We need to torch the idea that multiculturalism in this country is somehow guaranteed. 

The 0.1% rioters, with social media directing their anger, have put an end to that.

 To come to this country, immigrants need to sign up to Britain's distinctive moral values, rooted in its heritage of tolerance, fair play, the legal system, and a theological Christian ethos that, in today's secular world, is labelled as Liberalism. 

A desperate need to adjust this balance: People with low or no income can apply for an HC2 certificate to help with health costs, regardless of their nationality and/or immigration status. All asylum seekers are entitled to an HC2 certificate; some receive theirs automatically. An HC2 certificate entitles individuals to free NHS prescriptions, dental treatment, wigs and fabric support, sight tests, vouchers towards the cost of glasses or contact lenses, and necessary travel costs to and from a hospital for NHS treatment under the care of a consultant.

Home Office figures cited by the Financial Times in August last year showed that the annual asylum cost reached £3.96 billion in the year up to 2023—double that of the previous year and six times higher than 2018   

Multiculturalism

Cultures serve as "contexts of choice," which provide meaningful options and scripts with which people can frame, revise, and pursue their goals - William Kymlicka.

"Cultural membership plays an important role in people's self-identity 

- Avishai Margalit and Joseph Raz.

The idea of multiculturalism reflects a debate about how to understand and respond to the challenges of cultural diversity based on ethnic, national, and religious differences. Multiculturalism goes well beyond the definition of a 'melting pot', in which members of minority groups are expected to assimilate with the dominant culture. Instead, those voting for an ideal multiculturalism favour members of the minority group to maintain their distinctive collective identities and practices, as earlier suggested, 'the similar but different.' In Britain, as elsewhere, it is organised around the dominant group's language and culture, creating barriers for parts of minority groups in pursuing their social practices. Identity politics, the politics of difference, and "the politics of recognition" all contribute to multiculturalism. This applies to both sides, so minority groups do not feel marginalised. The dominant group need to adjust its patterns, taking into account any disadvantages the marginalised minority groups may suffer from categories that include religion, language, ethnicity, nationality, and race.

One problem that can act as a barrier to multiculturalism is the liberal approach. Liberals tend to uphold individual autonomy and appeal to ethical individualism. They insist that individuals should be free to choose and pursue their own ideas of the good life. They are atomistic by nature and prioritise individual rights over the collective communitarian ideals for national self-determination. British culture embraces choice, giving people options for living and pursuing their intentions, which forms an essential part of self-identity. To borrow from Charles Taylor, an eminent Canadian Philosopher, "Cultural identity provides people with an anchor for their self-identification and the safety of effortless secure belonging". This means there is a deep and general connection between a person's self-respect and the respect accorded to the cultural group of which Muslims are part. It is not simply membership in any culture, but in one's own culture, that must be secured for cultural membership to serve as a meaningful context of choice and a basis of self-respect.

Language no longer provides that communitarian identity for many Muslims; though embracing ethical Liberalism, they do so not in isolation from religion. In this case, Islam would serve as a group identity. Indeed, we end up in a clash of values, one which makes it harder to find a path of compromise between Muslims and the rest. Many Muslims take pride in this very fact, but that does not mean not mixing with the dominant group. It is this unwillingness to compromise in the face of secularising pressures, they would say, that makes Islam both vibrant and distinctive. They say it is undemocratic and illiberal to ask British Muslims to be as religious as they want at home but to keep their Islam out of public view. They refuse to accept that, for their group to prosper, religion would have to be controlled and constrained privately or by the state. We end up with State Liberalism against the Ideology of Islam. 

Integration

"I do not regard it [integration] as meaning the loss, by immigrants, of their own national characteristics and culture. I do not think that we need in this country a 'melting pot', which will turn everybody out in a common mould, as one of a series of carbon copies of someone's misplaced vision of the stereotyped Englishman. I define integration, therefore, not a flattening process of assimilation but as equal opportunity, accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance." - Roy Jenkins, British Home Secretary

The fear of Islam is central to the lack of integration. List of Islamist-related terrorists:

The Manchester Arena bombing – an Islamist extremist suicide bomber detonated a shrapnel-laden homemade bomb as people were leaving the Manchester Arena following a concert by American singer Ariana Grande.

The 2017 London Bridge attack was an incident where an attacker ran over multiple pedestrians on London Bridge. On Borough Market, the occupants of the van stabbed multiple people before being shot by police.

A bomb wrapped in a plastic grocery bag concealed in a bucket exploded at the height of the morning rush on the London Underground. ISIL claimed responsibility for the bombing.

The Rochdale child sex abuse ring involved underage teenage girls in Rochdale. Nine Asian men were convicted of sex trafficking and other offences, including rape, trafficking girls for sex and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child. 'I was raped more than 100 times from age 12', says a young rescued girl.

It is these and more like them we hear about from around the world that can keep divisiveness and discrimination alive and play havoc in an attempt to keep multiculturalism tamed.

Islam resistance

As a result, British Muslims are widely perceived as threatening, a perception that urgently needs to be addressed. This perception is based in large part on the above and on cultural differences between Muslims and rooted British culture that feed both rational and irrational Islamophobia. There seems to be a religious component of discrimination, identifying a discriminatory equilibrium in which both Muslim immigrants and native British act negatively toward one another in a self-perpetuating, vicious circle.

Disentangling the rational and irrational threads of Islamophobia is essential if Britain hopes to repair a social fabric that has frayed around the issue of Muslim immigration. Muslim immigrants must address their own responsibility for the failures of integration, and Britain must acknowledge the anti-Islam sentiments at the root of their antagonism—urgent public policy solutions aimed at promoting religious diversity in fair-minded host societies. Education plays a crucial role, as it can dispel misconceptions and foster understanding. We need to create the right environment so enough people have jobs and housing, and so people welcome immigrants instead of the resentment and division we see today. Also, to clear the backlog of asylum seekers waiting, ease the financial burden on the country, and solve social and economic problems.

At the extreme end of belief, there is a willing culture to accept Islam as an authoritarian religion, allowing it to colonise the mind. Whatever it teaches must be correct, and no other way of thinking is accepted, establishing a conflict between Religion and State, descending into medieval darkness, effectively submitting to rule from within, and abandoning reason and their free will. At the same time, their nature remains static and takes no account of self-reflection. Politically, Britain and countries in Europe with similar cultural structures, such as France and Germany, find themselves once more at a dangerous crossroads: the dark ages of illiberal Europe, which the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 resolved. The press and social media play such a significant role in spreading ideas that such enrollment is dangerous to the British way of life.

Conclusion

To end this rather lengthy essay, I turn to St. Augustine and ask why God did not make things similar. He replied if all things were identical, they would not exist. He created diversity not as a vehicle of self-realisation [...] but out of his love of his creation and as part of his design to create a perfect world. God could easily have created a uniform universe […], but he did not, showing how highly he valued diversity. In diversity, each one of us is endowed with a distinct nature whose constitution follows an identical drive towards the good life, and we each contribute to this harmony. Taken from Bhikhu Parekh's book 'Rethinking Multiculturalism'

Balancing immigrants' rights with the concerns of the white working class requires careful policy-making that addresses the needs of all groups while promoting fairness, inclusivity, and social cohesion. Promote equal protection under the law while safeguarding immigrants' rights and addressing the legitimate concerns of the white working class about job security, wages, and social services. Publicly emphasise that legal protections for immigrants are part of broader human rights protections that apply to everyone. It can help dispel the misconception that one group receives preferential treatment over another. Encourage initiatives that bring immigrants and the white working class together through community activities, sports, or local projects. Shared experiences and interactions can help build mutual understanding and reduce feelings of alienation. Organise cultural exchange programs that allow different communities to learn about each other's backgrounds and traditions. It can foster respect and appreciation for diversity—launch campaigns to address misconceptions about immigration, including immigrants' economic and social contributions. Educating the public about the benefits of immigration can help reduce fear and resentment.

A collage of ideas, therefore, taken from all walks of life, including the mainstream media, to look again at the differences and grievances. Pluralism in this great country of ours does not exist in a vacuum. We owe it at least to future generations to keep that spirit of British fair play and tolerance alive and keep the English or British heritage alive.