This week, two of those involved in Stephen Lawrence’s murder were jailed following an 18-year campaign by his parents; Shadow Health Minister, Diane Abbott, was caught in a ‘racism’ row over comments she made about white people; and The Economist used its main leader to defend the City.
All three are linked to the extent they demonstrate the complexities of issues relating to race and immigration, and the fact that, collectively, we’re not fully at ease with such issues.
Bagehot used his column to contrast the differing analyses of what the Lawrence convictions meant about British society:
“…each side is talking about a different thing. Mrs Lawrence is offering an answer to the question: is race still a problem in Britain? She says, accurately, that it is. In contrast, those heaping praise on the Lawrences are addressing separate, if related questions: have public attitudes to race changed, and did the Lawrence case play a part? The answer is yes, twice over.
Caution is needed. Britons have not become swooning converts to internationalism. Transatlantic Trends, a big annual opinion poll, found the British unusually hostile to immigration in its latest survey, with 68% of Britons seeing it as more of a problem than an opportunity, far exceeding the gloom found in France, Spain, Germany, Italy or America.”
Dorian Lynskey deftly deconstructs the opportunistic outrage against Diane Abbott about her tweets this week:
“What this absurd flap demonstrates is the desperate longing of some privileged people to wear the rags of victimhood. Any whiff of black-on-white racism, like misandry and heterophobia, is an excuse for these delicate souls to downplay the dominant prejudice and argue that there is a level playing field of bigotry or, on the crazier fringes, that there is a “war” on white people/men/straight people/motorists, etc. Coming so soon after the Lawrence verdict, Abbottgate is a nasty attempt to pretend that, hey, there’s racism on both sides now. A black man gets knifed to death by a white mob; a black MP writes a carelessly worded tweet about white people. It all evens out.”
And the Economist argued against net migration caps:
“…the City can compete successfully with other financial centres only if Britain has the right policies on regulation, tax and immigration…
The British government’s own policies on tax and immigration are … doing a lot of damage.…
Tight limits on talented immigrants damage the City’s prospects—and indeed the prospects of every bit of British business.”
The government’s bizarre net migration cap policy appears unworkable*, and also does little to prevent what Amartya Sen terms ‘plural monoculturalism’:
“This government has fallen into the same trap as the previous one – it is making policies based on negative perceptions and fears rather than addressing immigration as a neutral social phenomenon that can be as beneficial or as damaging as we make it. Sadly our government has a fantasy that if it can prevent people from coming and staying here, it will solve all our social problems.”
Issues of race and immigration are vexed and this week’s events have served only to underline that fact.
What remains unclear is whether the UK will ever reach a truly settled position on race and immigration, or whether – as seems more likely – we’re fated to muddle along with the appearance of a multicultural society, but with deep-rooted racial tension simmering under its surface.
*Read Cameron’s ‘good immgration, not mass immigration’ speech to see how confused the policy is.