Whose country is it anyway?

The Observer ^ | October 26, 2003 | Nitin Sawhney

[ijcr]

So there we have it: a Prime Minister who attacks a Muslim country with no provocation or apparent justification, a Home Secretary who believes there should be a 'test for Britishness', 17 BNP councillors and a racist police force. Does anyone mind if I don't pay my tax this year?

What particularly concerned me about last Tuesday's BBC broadcast of The Secret Policeman was that it exposed a continuing trend, rather than isolated incidents of racism among new police recruits.

Take PC Rob Pulling's statement, 'A dog born in a barn is still a dog; a Paki born in Britain is still a fucking Paki', and compare it with a Bernard Manning 'joke' - 'They actually think they're English because they're born here. That means if a dog's born in a stable, it's a horse.'

A striking fact is that the latter is a quote from Manning at a charity dinner attended by some 300 policemen (only one of whom was not white) in 1995. His audience clapped and cheered him on.

Since then, of course, we've had the Macpherson report. However, it is difficult to imagine that such worthy attempts to weed out institutional racism can compete with a culture where laughable tests for Britishness and unprovoked attacks on defenceless countries perpetuate the myth that immigrants and asylum seekers pose a threat to the wider population.

I read in a recent Observer Magazine that 39 per cent of teenagers believe the single biggest political issue is the regulation and control of asylum seekers. With such alarming statistics, it hardly helps for David Blunkett casually to dismiss last Tuesday's broadcast as a 'covert stunt' where he should be suggesting new ways to combat racism in the police.

One example of such racism in last Tuesday's documentary showed one recruit, PC Andy Hall of the Greater Manchester Police, proposing: 'We should have armed guards like on that Calais fucking crossing ... with guns, and any c*nt tries to get over, ***king shoot them.' Such strong views are an obvious extension of a culture where asylum seekers have become the latest scapegoats for racists everywhere.

One issue I found particularly disturbing in The Secret Policeman was the targeting of Asians by the police: 'To be honest, I don't mind blacks, proper blacks. It's just Pakis, they claim everything.'

'I class them as one thing and that's it, Pakis.'

'I'll admit it, I'm a racist bastard. I don't mind blacks. I don't mind black people. Asians? No.'

It is quite shocking to see how racists are even prepared to create hierarchies of prejudice for different cultures, particularly within the police force. I believe that the roots of such ignorance are far deeper and wider than The Secret Policeman might suggest.

Instead of treating the symptom by screening for anti-Asian police, we should examine the cause. The clear absence of sufficient Asian role models in mainstream sport, music and fashion is a sad reflection of a Britain segregated by fear, resentment and ignorance throughout society.

It is also a direct consequence of the linguistic, religious and cultural barriers that have made integration such an arduous struggle for British Asians. Addressing issues of multicultural education and media support could soften this struggle.

There have been tenuous steps in that direction. The school curriculum for many subjects has been transformed to embrace cultural diversity.

Television icons such as Sanjeev Bhaskar and Meera Syal have paved the way for an influx of Asian celebrities, and sports personalities such as Nasser Hussain have opened doors for those who wish to pursue a pluralistic vision of Britain.

However, I believe that ultimately racism can only be challenged by abandoning the emphasis that governments and the media place on the issue of one's nationality.

To be honest, I have never really understood the concept of national pride. After all, no one has ever achieved their nationality.

The geographical landmass on which we happen to have been born is simply a product of chance. So why should we make our nationality synonymous with our identity? In an enlightened world, surely it is time to see people as people and not products of various countries.

Such attitudes only lead to war and racial ignorance. Surely, when the world is becoming increasingly volatile, it is time to focus on human rights and not national territorialism.

In response to those featured in last Tuesday's documentary, I would like to quote Article 7 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: 'All are equal before the law and are entitled without discrimination to equal protection of the law.' I look forward to the day when that view is shared by the law itself.

[ijcr]

Replace nationality with religion...it will end all wars.

[Jakarta ex-pat]

"The geographical landmass on which we happen to have been born is simply a product of chance."

EXACTLY!

However, that the author of this drivel doesn't undertand that (s)he has just been shot in the foot speaks volumes.

[Scubes]

"It is also a direct consequence of the linguistic, religious and cultural barriers that have made integration such an arduous struggle for British Asians."

If that is true, and you don't like it, then stay in Asia where no such barriers exist.

[Verginius Rufus]

I think these jokes are variations on a retort supposedly made by the Duke of Wellington, a native of Dublin, when someone called him Irish: "Just because you're born in a stable doesn't make you a horse."

[FITZ]

I know Americans who were born in Germany because their parents were stationed on a military base there and they are still Americans. Completely American --- not at all German.

[mrustow]

It is also a direct consequence of the linguistic, religious and cultural barriers that have made integration such an arduous struggle for British Asians. Addressing issues of multicultural education and media support could soften this struggle.

Since multicultural education encourages non-whites to be hostile to whites, it is the last thing that will help integration. But then, as a multiculti, the last thing the writer wants is integration. As for "linguistic, religious, and cultural barriers," those are self-imposed by the Pakistanis.

There have been tenuous steps in that direction. The school curriculum for many subjects has been transformed to embrace cultural diversity.

He contradicted his previous statement, where he spoke of the lack of multic ed. And "embrac[ing] cultural diversity" is synonymous with embracing "cultural barriers."

Television icons such as Sanjeev Bhaskar and Meera Syal have paved the way for an influx of Asian celebrities, and sports personalities such as Nasser Hussain have opened doors for those who wish to pursue a pluralistic vision of Britain.

No, they didn't open doors; the doors were open for them. They walked in. Were Britain as racist as the writer claims, there would be nothing the aforementioned people could do to become successful in the UK.

And why does the writer insist on calling Pakistanis "Asians"? The cop didn't say he hated "Asians," but "Pakis." Oh, right. For multicultis, a person's identity is reduced to his continent (read: race). And if the writer says we should treat "Asians" as individuals, why does he viciously stereotype all white cops, based on one handy racist? And why he speak of "role models"? Role models only function in a racist world, in which people's identities are reduced to racial and ethnic group membership. Because he's a phony, who doesn't believe a word he says.

However, I believe that ultimately racism can only be challenged by abandoning the emphasis that governments and the media place on the issue of one's nationality.

To be honest, I have never really understood the concept of national pride. After all, no one has ever achieved their nationality.

The geographical landmass on which we happen to have been born is simply a product of chance. So why should we make our nationality synonymous with our identity? In an enlightened world, surely it is time to see people as people and not products of various countries.

You'd better tell that to the Pakistanis.

Such attitudes only lead to war and racial ignorance. Surely, when the world is becoming increasingly volatile, it is time to focus on human rights and not national territorialism.

Racial ignorance is perpetuated by propagandists who stereotype all police as racists, and all Pakistanis as victims.

In response to those featured in last Tuesday's documentary, I would like to quote Article 7 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: 'All are equal before the law and are entitled without discrimination to equal protection of the law.' I look forward to the day when that view is shared by the law itself.

I look forward to the day, when propagandists for "universal" human rights show the same respect for whites' human rights, as they do for non-whites.'

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I could have sworn that Britain's problem today is racist, gang-banging Pakistani boys, not racist, violent bobbies.

[King Prout]

39 per cent of teenagers believe the single biggest political issue is the regulation and control of asylum seekers

Only 39% of British teens can recognise the truth?
England is surely doomed.

[King Prout]

After all, no one has ever achieved their nationality

Ok, that just sent my BS meter off the damned dial.
Immigrants who enter a country legally, and then work hard to assimilate into that country's normal patterns -instead of waging a low-intensity war to corrupt and kill those norms- does indeed "acheive" his "nationality" as a matter of choice and effort.
Similarly, a native-born who recognises and supports what is good and strong in his own culture, and resists the war-efforts of invading barbarians, ALSO "acheives" his "nationality" as a matter of chouice, effort, and DUTY.

[King Prout]

eggzakly!

[lawdude]

Canada, the US, Great Britain, and Mexico are all basically Christian nations. BUT there is no more commonality than that. With respect to the citizens, we are molded by the political, religious, historical and social mores [sp.] of the rest of the citizenry.

Perhaps this accounts for the fact that some countries fall in the cesspool as they become more and more Islamified.

[gcruse]

Replace nationality with religion...it will end all wars.

There's a reason for most stereotypes.  Live long enough,
interact with enough people, and you'll learn which ones are true.

[Prodigal Son]

Only 39% of British teens can recognise the truth?

Hmmm. I saw 39% as a very positive number. Teen-agers are perhaps the most irrational segment of the population. They are much more given to their emotions and have a hard time taking a larger perspective into account when thinking about a problem. I'd say Britain's future is looking pretty bright if 4 out of 10 actually hold this view. The percentage is likely to increase as that same population segment hits adulthood and begins paying taxes/voting.

If you think about it, 40% in a parliamentary form of government was enough to get Schroeder elected in Germany. Were I a politician I would be simply ecstatic (within this political system) to have such a large chunk of anybody seeing this as a problem (assuming this was one of my core issues).