Multiculturalism is undermining democracy

Faith-based bloc-voting is a threat to our shared values and interests.

Rakib Ehsan
Columnist

Share
Topics Uncategorised

Last Tuesday marked a truly tragic day in British politics. The day began with extensive media coverage of the Chief Rabbi’s attack on anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. He asked the British public to ‘vote with their conscience’. Hours later, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) featured on BBC Politics Live, accusing the Conservative Party of tolerating Islamophobia within its party.

No doubt feeling left out, the Hindu Council UK issued a statement expressing solidarity with the Chief Rabbi, then proceeding to label Labour an anti-Hindu party. And to top off the grievance merry-go-round, the Sikh Federation UK offered the view that there was ‘too much emphasis on anti-Semitism and Islamophobia’. When it comes to racism and discrimination, ‘others like Sikhs are overlooked time and again’, it added. What better illustration of how our wonderfully diverse democracy has become infected by the virus of identity politics and is descending into a farcical competition for victimhood.

For some time, our political class has been wedded to multiculturalism, championing difference and diversity over cohesion. In doing so, it has failed to articulate a set of moral standards that can tie together the UK’s diverse set of ethnic and religious groups.

As I have previously pointed out on spiked, one consequence of this failure is that Middle Eastern and South Asian geopolitics have become major considerations for ethnic-minority voters in this General Election. Politicians have, for some time, championed particular sides in international conflicts and disputes on the grounds of what is electorally beneficial. This has also involved developing close ties with divisive group-specific organisations. This includes the MCB, which within two weeks of the brutal Islamist murder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim shopkeeper Asad Shah in Glasgow published a position statement which declared that its members were not obliged to recognise Ahmadis as fellow Muslims.

There are many religiously affiliated organisations operating in the UK which are responsible for the crudest forms of prejudice imaginable. Individuals are accused of betraying their faith if they adopt a certain position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the ongoing Indo-Pakistani Kashmir dispute, or the Khalistan secessionist movement in the Punjab region. Self-appointed community leaders position themselves as the ultimate authority on deciding what constitutes a good Jew, a loyal Muslim, a proper Hindu and a real Sikh. A flurry of religious associations, as well as organisations affiliated to foreign political parties, are now threatening to use these geopolitical positions to influence domestic electoral outcomes.

Following a Labour Party conference motion which condemned the Indian government and called for ‘international intervention’ over Kashmir, the Overseas Friends of BJP UK declared that they would seek to defeat the party’s candidates in a number of constituencies across the country. The body’s president, Kuldeep Singh Shekhawat, has claimed that ‘if the entire Indian community in the UK votes Tory, we will see a swing of around 40 seats to the Tories’. ‘This will swing the actual election result’, he said.

The Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) has launched a campaign encouraging British Muslim voters to defeat ‘Islamophobic’ Conservative MPs – identifying 14 constituencies of importance under its Operation Muslim Vote campaign. The MPAC’s propaganda is hugely oriented towards territorial disputes in other parts of the world, including Kashmir and Palestine.

As a British Muslim of South Asian origin, I can personally say that I have heard far too much about territorial disputes taking place in the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent during the build-up to what is meant to be a UK General Election. The efforts of religious organisations and affiliate bodies for non-UK political parties – large and small – to generate faith-based bloc voting should be a cause for political concern.

Only a few weeks ago, swathes of the UK were devastated by flooding, ruining family homes and small businesses. Social care for the elderly and disabled is at breaking point. Many deprived inner-city areas continue to be ravaged by crime and delinquency. Left-behind former coal-mining and steel communities have been starved of meaningful state investment in infrastructure for decades. Domestic extremist threats continue to loom over the law-abiding British majority. Brexit hangs in the balance. Territorial disputes across the globe may be of great interest to faith-based actors, but how interested is the average British voter in such issues?

The UK could be on the verge of an identity-politics breakdown. And make no mistake: our politicians are reaping what they have sowed.

Dr Rakib Ehsan is a researcher who specialises in British public attitudes and political behaviour. Views expressed in this article are solely his own.

Picture by: Getty

No paywall. No subscriptions.
spiked is free for all.

Donate today to keep us fighting.

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

steve moxon

2nd December 2019 at 7:22 pm

Not according to the BBC. Pointing out faults with multiculturalism is “extremism”; as is pointing to demographic trends, and as is preferring your own culture. [BBC2 Countryfile October 6]
With non-replies (no point addressed) from the Boob’s Executive Complaints Unit, my complaint is now off to OFCOM
BBC Complaints — Case number CAS-5666819-0CQLRZ. Extreme political bias, hate-mongering.
* Unfounded and actually themselves hate-mongering claims of extremism by the BBC here. It is in no sense “extremist” to criticise ‘multiculturalism’, which is a discredited political philosophy that has failed in practice, and from which there has been retreat, condemned as it is by none other than Trevor Philips, among many prominent public figures with a well-known anti-racism stance.
It is likewise in no sense “extremist” to point to the well-documented demographic changes that are on a firm, well-evidenced and researched trajectory to render a minority those with deep British Isles ancestry, and, indeed, to lead to their replacement — through the evident persistence of migrant enclaves together with dilution in admixture, as it were. It is also in no sense “extremist” but perfectly natural to express a preference for one’s own cultural major in-group (especially when this is that of the nation in which you yourself reside), as when those with deep British Isles ancestry often do. Research reveals that intuitively distinguising between one’s in-group and others envisaged in effect as belonging instead to an out-group is not through hostility to the out-group but affinity with the in-group. [Seminal paper: Yamagishi & Mifune (2009). Social exchange and solidarity: in-group love or out-group hate?] The extremism here was in the BBC report itself: ’identity politics’ totalitarian hatred towards the UK populace. For a referenced outline of the origin, development and manifestation of this ideology, to see why it’s been adopted by the BBC, see my referenced review, ‘The Origin of “Identity Politics” and Political Correctness’. It’s published in The Quarterly Review, within a journal-published science review paper, and at my site.
The BBC is now a non-reformable ‘hate group’ in the full meaning of that term, and would be a proscribed extremist organisation under government rules.

steve moxon

2nd December 2019 at 7:23 pm

THE BOOB’S REPLY [JEREMY HAYES, COMPLAINTS DIRECTOR]
Thank you for your email about an item in Countryfile about far-right extremist groups operating in the English countryside. In your original complaint you stated that the programme had failed to make it clear why the groups discussed in the report should be regarded as extremist. In a subsequent email you stated that it was not, in your opinion, extremist to oppose multiculturalism, to point to demographic changes or to express a preference for “one’s own” demographic group.
The BBC’s approach to such matters is set out in the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines on Accuracy and Impartiality, which refer to due accuracy and due impartiality, that which is “adequate and appropriate” in the context of the output. In this case the questions you raise concern the accuracy of the terms used to describe the groups mentioned in the report. I have reviewed the programme. The reporter, Charlotte Smith began by referring to reports that Neo-Nazi groups had been holding ritual events at a well known heritage site in Avebury. This had been confirmed by the National Trust which manages the site. She then referred to and showed videos of demonstrations by a pan-European organisation called Generation Identity, which aims to “preserve” what it describes as to “our peoples’ ethnocultural identity”. She also documented the activities of a British group, which shares many of Generation Identity’s core principles, called British Revival. She interviewed its leader, Michael Wrenn, a previous organiser for Generation Identity who said the two organisations were “in the same ball park”.
It is a matter of record that the Government’s Commission for Countering Extremism has referred to “the explicitly racial ethnopluralism of groups like Generation Identity.” An Overview of the Far Right report commissioned by the CCE by Dr Benjamin Lee of Lancaster University says that Generation Identity is among groups which have made a concerted effort to improve their overall aesthetic appeal and distinguish themselves from older forms of far-right activism. The leader of the Commission for Countering Extremism remarked in response to the Countryfile report:
When a group like British Revival turns out to be founded by a former leader of Generation Identity it is cause for significant concern.
I therefore conclude that the examples given in the programme did refer to groups whose aims and philosophies are regarded by experts and a government advisory organisation as far right, which would in my judgment bear out the reporter’s references to “far right extremists,” and lead me not to uphold your complaint.

steve moxon

2nd December 2019 at 7:25 pm

MY REPLY TO JEREMY HAYES, BBC COMPLAINTS DIRECTOR:
As ever from the BBC with any and every complaint anybody ever makes about the BBC’s institutional extreme politics — its hate-mongering towards the mass of ordinary people, indeed — there is complete failure even to begin to address the points raised.
You in no way defend the three extremist positions the BBC adopts in the broadcast that I outline, and pretend the extremism in the broadcast somehow is by others, or that the extremism you suppose by others somehow absolves the BBC of extremism of its own.
I will of course complain to OFCOM, which is, of course, just as big a bunch of groupthink ‘identity politics’ totalitarians (‘PC’-fascists, as it were) as your appallingly bad selves, as are the institutions you here hide behind in citing, as if this were some sort of defence. Obviously you easily can find others in the echo chamber of our contemporary totalitarianism of ‘identity politics’ / ‘PC’. The prime job of any public service broadcaster is precisely to cut through such malicious nonsense to engage with truth and reality.
The BBC is not funded by legally enforced taxation on the basis that it is a public disservice, but that is just what the BBC now is — the Boob, we call it round here. You may reflect on how long this can continue before a comeuppance: surely the greater the longer the impasse persists.

David Webb

2nd December 2019 at 3:46 pm

We don’t have shared values. The point of multiculturalism is to allow the immigration of people who ARE NOT LIKE US and will never share our values. If you support non-white immigration, you should celebrate the London Bridge killings. It’s that simple.

charles barry

3rd December 2019 at 11:11 am

i am writing an essay on to what extent has multiculturalism failed in the uk for my school assignment. any suggestions or points of view?

Jim Lawrie

2nd December 2019 at 1:26 pm

Gerrymandering is not democracy. That is what “Faith-based bloc-voting” is.

Robert Spowart

2nd December 2019 at 12:26 pm

And what is “Islamophobia and why, in their efforts to stir up division do so many people ignore the most pertinent question, “What is it about Islam that has led to it, alone of the non-British Religions, having it’s own personal “~ophobia”? Other than Judaism’s problems with the institutionally antisemitic & increasingly Islamised @ukLabour, no other belief has such a suffix or apparent slur added to its name.

After all, Sikhophobia, Buddhistophobia, Hinduophobia, Jainophobia etc are conspicuous by their absence and generally the followers of those religions have not only become a part of, but contributed to British Society in a way that, by and large, Islam has never even tried to emulate.

Why is that?
Could it be that individual followers of those other religions do not have a tendency to blow themselves up in pop concerts? Nor, generally speaking, do they take part in the gang organised rape, sexual exploitation & trafficking of young girls.

If the apologists for Islam take their blinkers off and take a broader, world wide look at the actions of Islamists in the wider world they will see a different picture to the “Religion Of Peace” to the one they try so hard to portray.
The murder and mutilation of concert goers at The Bataclan or the recent bombings in Sri Lanka for example.

The bombing of the Rawda Mosque and other internecine violence within Islam points to a tragic truth that the most common cause of violent death to Muslims today is other Muslim.

Nor do they comment on the the continuing slaughter of Christians by Islamists in many parts of Africa, largely ignored by Western media.
It is things like this that create the legitimate fear & distrust they pass of as “Islamophobia.”

Davy Hayes

2nd December 2019 at 12:59 pm

Well said, sir

JS QT

2nd December 2019 at 11:01 am

This is a fair assessment. However, it’s also worth taking into account that the Hindu community only came out with this endorsement as a counter-reaction to the Pakistani weaponisation of the issue within the Labour party over decades.

The motion that Labour recently passed unanimously was unnecessarily divisive and made no reference to the ethnic cleansing of religious minorities by armed militias in the Valley in the 1990s, a pain which is still being felt by them and their descendants to this day.

Amelia Cantor

2nd December 2019 at 10:25 am

Faith-based bloc-voting is a threat to our shared values and interests.

But if we have “shared values”, we’ll be voting for those values however we vote. So where’s the problem?

In fact, of course, we don’t have shared values.

Whites have the values of white supremacy, racism and Islamophobia.

The Muslim community and other BAME communities have the shared values of equality, anti-racism and tolerance.

That’s why BAME community vote for Labour and Jeremy Corbyn. They can recognise a universalist and humanitarian when they see one.

George Orwell

2nd December 2019 at 12:38 pm

Amelia,
The precise opposite of reality, as usual. A fine demonstration of leftist ‘projection’.

Titus Groan

6th December 2019 at 7:41 pm

Oh I thought this was humour of the Titania McGrath sort ?

Ed Turnbull

2nd December 2019 at 1:31 pm

That’s better Amelia, good to see you getting back on form (I’d still like to see a bit more of the ‘vulnerable muslims of colour’ material, it always puts a smile on my face.

I’ve got to say: some of you recent posts had me worried. They’d adopted a snarky tone that suggested you considered those far-right white supremacists who write for Sp!ked weren’t *sufficiently* far-right for your taste. In one comment you were sarcastically critical of Sp!ked’s position on open borders, and I did wonder if you’d gone full ethno-nationalist.

If you’ll forgive me here’s a wee piece of advice: the key to being an effective troll is to adopt a position and stick to it. I know it can be hard work at times, but it pays dividends in the end. (If Andrew Doyle’s feeling charitable he may offer you a gig at Comedy Unleashed). I find your intersectional woke material so hilarious, so more of that please.

Chin chin

H McLean

2nd December 2019 at 8:23 pm

Well done, ED. I usually give AC a wide berth because I see her comments as disingenuous troll bait, but if anyone feels compelled to respond to her your comment shows exactly how it should be done. Gold standard, top kek.

Amelia Cantor

3rd December 2019 at 12:02 pm

You forgot even more important advice:

* Don’t be a windbag and a bore.

But at your age, no doubt the memory’s not what it was.

Jim Lawrie

2nd December 2019 at 10:24 am

For more than a century the left have been telling people what they should think and vote based on religion, ethnicity and class. And what is verbottem to them. They can hardly complain now that others have cottoned onto this.

The 3rd worlders brought their divisions and prejudices with them. Saying otherwise absolves them of responsibility and fault. It makes matters worse to place the blame with The Indigenous British for not accommodating and bending to the will of the foreigners.
It has now reached a high point with the ideology that white people are innately racist and privileged. A doctrine that 3rd worlders have latched onto only too willingly.

The left is culpable in all of this, but each faction defects this by pointing the finger at their rivals. If the left do not put their hands up and address this, someone else will come along and represent white interest. It will not be pretty. History tells us that people do not return to the situation that drove them across that line. White people right now are politically homeless in their own lands.

Accusations of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia have not stopped the Labour and Conservative Parties from making steady progress in the opinion polls.
There are plenty of people who will vote for a party because it is seen as willing to challenge Muslim ideology.
Muslims will vote Labour because it will not do this and is seen as anti-Semitic. Labour know that, and care little about the loss of 100,000 Jewish votes for the gain of 3 million Muslim votes.

A Conservative victory will be trumpeted as proof positive that all the accusations levelled against white people are true. But the Conservatives are too spineless to live up to any of this, so people will look elsewhere.

Davy Hayes

2nd December 2019 at 9:40 am

I am a member of what appears to be an increasingly derided ethnic group. I can be mocked and vilified for the colour of my skin, my age, my sexual orientation, my political beliefs, my class and some even want me to be disenfranchised.
Although a non believer, I am saddened to see the faiths of my country mocked, whilst others appear to be beyond criticism, to see the history of my country traduced.
All of this is of course, because I am a 70 year old, white, straight, working class man, who still believes it is a privilege
All of this because I am a “white”, 70 year old, “straight” ” working class man aka” gammon” who, despite all, believes, it is still a privilege to be British.

Dominic Straiton

2nd December 2019 at 9:13 am

Forcing cultures together doesnt work hence Pakistan and India. The ancient Romans knew this. They were multi ethnic but monoculture. The only place it has ever worked is the US .I wouldnt give them another hundred years.

Michael Lynch

2nd December 2019 at 9:39 am

I’d even go as far as saying it hasn’t worked in America either unless you are white with a European background. They crushed the indigenous population and stole their land to create the States in the first place. Repelled Mexicans from Texas and California and then used slavery as an economic model in most of the South. I wouldn’t even give them 25 years.

George Orwell

2nd December 2019 at 12:35 pm

Michael.
The indigenous tribes were very small in a vast open continent, had no concept of land ownership, did nothing to make the land in general more productive (except locally for short periods), died young from disease and intertribal wars of horrific brutality and habitually practised slavery of captured members of other tribes.
Many of them are now very wealthy from gambling concessions on their own lands and enjoy all the other benefits of a more advanced civilisation so do give it a rest. No indigenous person would go back to their old days.

K Tojo

2nd December 2019 at 10:08 am

I read somewhere that the ancient Romans, weary of the endless warring among rival Celtic tribes gathered said tribes together for a peace conference. The tribes could not put aside their long established hatred of one another and the conference ended in mutual slaughter. This worked out well for the Romans. [I know, citation needed]

H McLean

2nd December 2019 at 8:18 am

For multiculturalism to work the culture and language of the host country should not only be respected but MUST come first in all things. Considering that in most other countries that is already the case, we really need to talk about why in English-speaking countries the dominant liberal culture means the chattering middle classes not only scoff at the idea of western democratic nations having ANY sort of relevant culture, they also believe their own country’s history and culture is evil and must be dismantled.

For the most part, Brits abroad are acutely conscious of respecting the culture of countries they visit and would be mortified at the prospect of committing a cultural faux pas, yet at home the notion is all but flipped on it’s head, with ordinary people, civil servants, the judiciary and politicians all terrified of doing anything that might offend the people of migrant cultures.

Remember, those who would call you a -phobe or and -ist when you speak of things they object to rely on your basic politeness and aversion of being perceived as rude. They expect you to self-censor and remain passive in the face of, well, everything they can throw at you. Do not give them the satisfaction of staring at your shoes and saying nothing. The contempt they feel for you will continue regardless.

Robert Spowart

2nd December 2019 at 3:24 pm

Excellent Comments, Sir.

Echo Romulus

2nd December 2019 at 8:01 am

“Not being of the same tribe is a cause of strife until they “breathe in sync”, for just as a state does not develop from an accidental mob, so too it does not come together at an accidental time.”

Some bloke on politics.

Philip Humphrey

2nd December 2019 at 7:28 am

I disagree. Sometimes people of a particular faith will tend to vote one way on an issue. For example, as a Catholic I will not vote for any pro abortion candidate if I can avoid it, especially not one of the Labour party feminists who want to see the killing of unborn children ” decriminalised”. But it is my choice, I freely choose it just as I chose to be a Catholic.

It’s not really multiculturalism that is a threat to democracy. Genuine multiculturalism means freedom of religion, philosophy and belief from interference by the state “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…” The problem is leftists don’t really believe in multiculturalism at all, what they want is a multi colored society with their values, philosophy and (lack of) religion imposed on it. And that is a threat to democracy.

charles barry

3rd December 2019 at 11:13 am

how is it a threat to democracy?

Jane 70

2nd December 2019 at 4:01 am

We’re already witnessing the ‘breakdown’ alluded to: the UK is fragmenting,fracturing into parallel societies.

Yet still the likes of Corbyn, Sturgeon, Abbott and the truly awful Osborne commend open borders, freedom of movement and the vibrant joys of diversity.

Mad jihadis are given the benefit of the doubt, so that they may ‘integrate’ and become useful members of society.

Identity groups compete to shut down all and any informed criticism of,and doubts about, their various motives.

Cultural and moral relativism are the order of the day.

Tribal voting occurs,as we all know, but cannot object to,and all the while we, the indigenous Brits, look on in dismay,as our country and way of life become unrecognisable.

Now that election fatigue has well and truly set in, we are offered virtue-signalling contests on the telly,which are sold as serious political debates.

So we endure the faux outrage of the likes of Swinson, Sturgeon,Lucas and, each seemingly intent on winning Irritating Politician award 2019.

George Wake

2nd December 2019 at 3:39 am

Multiculturalism, properly done, is great – I have cooked meals, served in my living room, to people from all continents – the lingua franca was English. When I travel, I speak Spanish, French, Dutch Hindi / Urdu (not fluently), but I try, and when in Rome, I try to do as the Romans – this is a basic courtesy to the people and the culture you are visiting. Here, wher the loony left have infiltrated the entire system, the ‘Friends of every country but their own’, they insist that the indigenous adapt – or at least most of them. Those promulgating these ideas don’t have to do this – see Yvette cooper, Diane Abbot, Corbyn, Milne etc.
The impending election, and the recent terrorist activity along with other things seem to have generated a spirit of ‘Wake up, the Philistines are upon thee’. Not that they have ever not been upon thee, but we, the people, need to say’enough’, and actually effect this idea, otherwise all of the acheivements of English cuture (and there are many) will be lost – scientific rigour, the ‘stiff upper lip’, the innate sense of fair play we have are all under attack, largely from millionaire ‘socialists’. Get off your asses, the enemy is at the gate!

K Tojo

2nd December 2019 at 1:15 am

What on earth did the multiculture enthusiasts expect? Did they imagine that disparate communities from the old Commonwealth and Europe would leave their long established hostilities /resentments behind them and live together with us peace, harmony and brotherhood?

Did they also imagine that communities which only grudgingly integrate with the host population if at all would leave behind dubious political and commercial practises which kept the wheels turning nicely back home?

In some half-baked socialist dream maybe. The socialist dream, of course, never dies – no matter how many times it fails.

L Strange

2nd December 2019 at 1:12 am

The Balkanisation of the country is, I’m ‘reliably’ informed, a strength. It leads to ‘community cohesion’, you know.

It’s going to get a lot worse.

Jim Lawrie

2nd December 2019 at 10:36 am

The Ottoman Turks imposed people of different religions and ethnicities all around their empire to strengthen their grip by destroying those societies. It was most at its most intense in The Balkans and The Middle East. That is what we, throughout Western Europe, are bequeathing to our children.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.