Yossi Mekelberg
No one could accuse Britain’s Home Secretary Suella Braverman of shying away from some bruising political bouts. But what, how and who she picks on is disturbing and mainly reflects her distorted view of Britain’s diverse and inclusive society — powered by her unquenchable thirst for political power.
For her, it is not necessarily the case that the sky is the limit, but 10 Downing Street is most definitely her goal and if achieving it entails sowing the seeds of discord and damaging the delicate fabric of a multicultural society, it is a price worth paying.
Her latest assaults on immigration and diversity included recent speeches — delivered, unsurprisingly, at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington, followed by another horror show at the recent Conservative Party Conference in Manchester — in which she argued that multiculturalism “has failed because it allowed people to come to our society and live parallel lives in it,” and warned against an imaginary “hurricane” of immigrants.
Call me naive but, of all people, it is Braverman who should have been the poster child for immigration, integration and, hence, multiculturalism. After all, she is the daughter of immigrants, who in her early 30s was elected as a member of Parliament and has risen, quickly, through the ranks to a senior Cabinet position under a prime minister, Rishi Sunak, whose parents were not born in the UK but settled very successfully here.
What can explain the eagerness of Braverman and Sunak to decry people just like themselves, in that respect? Is it some sort of self-hatred? Are they ashamed of their backgrounds?
Claiming that “uncontrolled immigration, inadequate integration and a misguided dogma of multiculturalism have proven a toxic combination for Europe over the last few decades,” as Braverman did, is not only far from the truth but also an affront to many millions of people who were not born in the UK, or anywhere else in Europe, and have become constructive citizens of their respective countries.
It is customary to point out that many migrants were, or have become, doctors, nurses, teachers, engineers, lawyers, successful musicians and renowned athletes, the kind of people that politicians love to rub shoulders with. But what about all those from ethnic minorities who are doing the menial, low-paid jobs that are necessary for the health of our economy?
Braverman might not think that they are as integrated as she is, since they were not able to attend a private school and then graduate from Cambridge University, as she did. But someone should tell her, and her like-minded Tory supporters, that in return for all their crucial contributions to British society immigrants deserve thanks, not vilification.
Conservative politicians who oppose immigration are unashamedly using the “dog whistle” tactic in an attempt to deflect attention from their government’s many shortcomings on so many other issues. This is a despicable tactic. There is no cheaper trick, especially as nationalism is on the rise, than to blame newcomers for what is going wrong in our societies without a shred of evidence that supports the argument.
When Braverman speaks about immigrants “not embracing British values,” living “parallel lives” to the rest of the country, not learning English, and “not taking part in British life,” she does not see the need to define those values and explain what exactly “British life” is. Instead, she prefers to pretend that Britain has always been some kind of unitary monoculture that only now is being “threatened” by incomers, and in particular incomers with black or brown skin.
It is common to refer to tolerance, respect, democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and even a strong sense of fair play as being traditional British values. But it is those who constantly malign migrants before they arrive, during their efforts to settle in the country, and even after they become citizens, who need to take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves whether it is they, rather than the migrants, who are failing to adhere to those values.
One of Braverman’s grievances with migrants is that they might have little or no command of the English language. Few would dispute the importance of knowledge of the language for the purposes of social integration. Yet instead of being hostile to migrants, among them asylum seekers who have been less fortunate than herself in acquiring a perfect command of English, she could, as a senior member of the Cabinet, call for the government to facilitate more affordable language courses for every newcomer, and even classes on citizenship and British history.
Disturbingly, however, there is something deeper, something racist, in these innuendos from Braverman and her supporters that suggest that because of who they are and where they came from, immigrants will never be able to internalize British or even European values.
This argument reveals a complete lack of awareness that for centuries, European nations were ruled by authoritarian regimes and extreme ideologies, ravaged by wars, and colonized large parts of the world by means of war, terror and atrocities.
And all of this was done by white people at a time when immigration was insignificant in terms of numbers. It is only since the end of the Second World War that Europe has begun to rebuild itself around the Kantian idea of perpetual peace, through the gradual formation of the EU — the very project that Braverman’s party was so keen to abandon in such a rush.
The Conservative Party Conference is over, the home secretary has had her round of applause from her dyed-in-the-wool supporters and the right-wing client media. For the rest of us, it is back to our multicultural lives, which include recognition of the immense contribution of migrants to innovation, creativity and the economic growth of the UK over many decades, not to mention opening a window on new and enriching perspectives from around the globe.
Not all parts of this Union are equally diverse. But among those in the UK who have seen those benefits mentioned above, their human experience has been enriched. There are, without doubt, considerable challenges, too. Such problems as there might be are exacerbated by those who opportunistically conflate the crisis in the immigration system with what they claim are failures of multiculturalism, claims that alienate more than 10 million of the people who permanently reside in the UK but were not born here.
But happily, most of us celebrate the diversity of, and within, this country, while ensuring that those who do not appear, speak or act in ways that comply with whatever Braverman thinks is “truly” British feel welcome and supported in their efforts to integrate; and by doing so benefit themselves and everyone else.
In the words of former American First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt: “Pit race against race, religion against religion, prejudice against prejudice. Divide and conquer. We must not let that happen here.”
