Opinion - News Analysis   

Immigrants are more British than the natives

Hasan Suroor

Out ofLondon A new study reveals the deep identity crisis facing the United Kingdom.

IN AN old joke about the influx of non-English speaking immigrants into Britain, a bewildered white Toff, lost for directions in London's Piccadilly Circus and surrounded by foreigners speaking strange languages, cries out: "Is there anyone here who speaks English, for God's sake?" Alas, there was none.

Today, if he were to stand in the middle of an all-white English-speaking throng and ask: "Is there anyone here who is British, for God's sake?" he might find himself in a minority again. The chances are that not many of his white countrymen are likely to stand up and be counted as being British. But, on the other hand, if he were to walk up the road and ask the Indian newsagent round the corner or the neighbourhood Pakistani cabbie how they saw themselves he would be among "Brits."

For, according to a new study, the idea of Britishness is more widely prevalent among ethnic minority groups than native white Britons who tend increasingly to assert their regional identities, and insist on being described as "English," "Scottish," or "Welsh" rather than British. More than 50 per cent of immigrants — mostly Asians and Africans — describe themselves as British whereas only 29 per cent of their white peers answer to that description.

An artificial construct

The findings confirm an embarrassing truth about modern Britain that the political class, for obvious reasons, does not want to confront: namely, the fact that there is no such thing as "Britishness." There never was. It was an artificial construct designed to hold the empire together by fostering a common sense of "Britishness" among people of disparate identities that comprised the United Kingdom.

Britishness was a brand that sold well at home and abroad as long as the Raj lasted. When it collapsed, with it went the appeal of being British and the latent regional identities within the U.K. started to re-assert themselves. To many in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales, the idea of being ruled from London smacked of a form of colonialism triggering calls for political self-rule as well as for greater recognition of their cultures. Both politically and culturally they felt threatened by what they regarded essentially as "Englishness" dressed up as "Britishness" just as the English complained that their values were being swamped by other cultures in the name of Britishness.

When New Labour came to power in 1997, it started the process of devolution of political power with Scotland getting its own parliament, and Wales and Northern Ireland winning the right to govern themselves through local assemblies. But at the deeper cultural level, the identity question has remained unresolved.

If anything, greater political autonomy has led people in those parts to become even more conscious of their ethnicity diluting even further whatever little sense they had of being British.

How much the notion of Britishness has weakened in recent years is illustrated by the fact that the number of Britons (both native and immigrants) who believed that "British" was the best way to describe them fell from 52 per cent in 1996 to 44 per cent in 2005. The latest study by the Labour-leaning Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and reported by The Sunday Times simply confirms the steady decline of Britishness fuelling fears whether the United Kingdom would remain "united" for long.

The upcoming elections to the Scottish Parliament, in May, could well spark the process of disintegration of the U.K. as we have known it if the Scottish National Party, which stands for an independent Scotland, wins power. A recent poll showed that more and more people in England, in fact, wanted Scotland to secede as they believed that they were being ruled by a "Scottish mafia" more loyal to its own constituents back home than to English voters.

The Chancellor, Gordon Brown, a Scot, might find his prime ministerial ambitions under pressure if Scotland decides to sever its 300-year-old links with the U.K. The question being asked is: how can a Scot, however "British," become the Prime Minister of a nation from which his own country has seceded?

This should give some idea of how deep the identity crisis facing Britain is. With native white Britons becoming increasingly conscious of their regional identities, it is not surprising that the only people left to wave the British flag are the immigrants. Having traded their own national identities for a British passport they have no other way to define themselves except as British. They may call themselves "British Indians," "British Muslims" or "British Asians" but being British remains their primary identity.

As Bernard Crick, a leading expert on citizenship, told The Sunday Times: "To the immigrant, Britishness is essentially a legal and political structure. It doesn't mean the culture. When the immigrant says I am British he is not saying he wants to be English or Scottish or Welsh."

Meanwhile, the biggest mystery surrounding Britishness is: what does it really mean? "Englishness" denotes a certain way of life as does "Scottishness," "Irishness" or "Welshness." But what is Britishness except an invention dreamt up to unify the empire? Time, perhaps, to acknowledge that it is an idea that is well past its sell-by date — and do it before the only "Brits" left are the immigrants.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Tamil Nadu and LTTE menace
An avoidable tragedy
Poverty, human rights, and development
A way out of the logjam
Bird flu in Pakistan sparks concern
Immigrants are more British than the natives
What will life be like on the moon?
Corrections and Clarifications
Security failure
Reaction to blast
Rein them in
Female foeticide

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu