Perspectives

on immigration

T he 21st century has seen opposition to the

influx of economic migrants in the UK become

a central issue in the public sphere. The

tabloid media sits firmly in the anti-immigration

camp, with sensationalist headlines beckoning

the British public to share in their stance.

Even on the left of the political spectrum,

politicians have pandered to the public and media

on the issue. Anti-immigration sentiment has even

permeated popular culture in the last few years;

the infamous Morrissey interview conducted by the

NME - in which The Smiths singer lamented the loss

of a distinctive British identity - is the example

that springs to mind.Perhaps most troubling is that references made

to the ‘immigration explosion’ and ‘flooded gates’

are almost reminiscent of Enoch Powell’s ‘rivers

of blood’ speech. Political correctness has

prevented the overt racism that characterised

the immigration debates of previous generations

in this country, but comparisons can still be

drawn. It’s true that many people today are

merely expressing legitimate concerns regarding

the rate of immigration, but there are members

of the ‘indigenous’ population spewing out the

xenophobic prejudices of old. National identity

is still frequently viewed as a fixed entity, and

thus as something that is destroyed with change.

This notion is overly conservative, and entirely

untrue; growing heterogeneity in our society marks

transformation of the British identity, as opposed

to disintegration. Unity in diversity is not an

uncommon fact of collective human existence, nor

does it amount to a death sentence for national

identity.In opposition to the hostility aimed at

immigrants in our country today, the photographer

Andrew Jackson captures the life of one twenty-

first century economic migrant in particular

through a sympathetic lens. Photos from his

exhibition The Golden Road adorn this publication,

as well as opinion pieces by LSE students. The

latter are grouped into three sections: the

media’s portrayal of immigrants, the politics

of immigration, and the effects of immigration

on national identity. In this, the inaugural

issue of Clare+, our hope is that you find the

striking imagery and accompanying written pieces a

welcome addition to the wider immigration debate.

Moreover, we hope that you appreciate the largely

positive attitudes conveyed in this issue.

by Annalise Toberman, Special Projects Editor

The Journal of the LSE Students’ Union

The Media,

Immigration

and

Public Policy.

Immigration. T

he word itself

conjures a mul

titude of nega

tive

connotations i

n Britain toda

y. How

can it be that

this one word

– that

so many of the

political lit

e insist

has enriched a

nd contributed

to

our vibrant cu

lture and soci

ety in

modern 21st cen

tury Britain –

is so

controversial

and emotive in

today’s

political clim

ate? The answe

r seems

to be a simple

one, due (in

no small

part) to the r

ole of the med

ia in

how immigratio

n has been por

trayed

over the years

.

Be it the pres

s, television,

radio or the s

o-called ‘new

media’,

the role of th

e media in the

presentation o

f immigration

to the

wider public c

annot be under

stated

when examining

the perceptio

n of

immigration as

a ‘problem’ t

hat

must be ‘solve

d’, in British

consciousness

today. To take

print

media as an ex

ample. Certain

newspapers – w

ith questionab

le

private agenda

s – invariably

seem to

prefer printin

g stories rega

rding

the failure of

previous (and

indeed current) public policies towards immigration as reasons for the widely-alleged failure of multi-culturalism in Britain today. Particularly popular topics of scrutiny include the extent of social cohesion that the immigrant population can and should obtain on arrival in Britain and the economic contributions (or lackthereof) that migrants offer to the United Kingdom in the present day.

Sadly the trend, particularly in the print media seems to be one of negativity in both of these respects. Immigrants are often painted as lazy, economically idle people who simply seek to settle in Britain for a ‘free ride’. Modern media sources often MMedia

The Daily Mail recently suggested that the negative cost of immigration to the UK is in the region of £8.8 billion. A closer look at the items included in this lists of ‘costs’ of immigration shows how selective such analyses can be. This estimation included the £32 million for the Commission for Racial Equality (obviously migrants are to be blamed for the “new” problem of racism), local authority race relations costs, ethnic minority award schemes and border controls (which undoubtedly would increase with the Daily Mail’s desired immigration policies). In a report that suggests the Daily Mail’s tendency to exaggerate, the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee found just a few months after the Daily Mail’s article that recent levels of immigration had ‘little or no impact’ on the economic well-being of the UK.

by Danny Beales

blame generous social security benefits for this. However, that there is underlying prejudice towards other ethnic, cultural and religious groups in the media – bordering on xenophobia – cannot be refuted. The constant coverage of immigration (that is often depicted as leading to disparaging results) has undoubtedly imprinted the British psyche. It has raised immigration to the top of the political agenda – perhaps foolishly when there are so many other urgent problems to be resolved at present (two foreign wars, a massive economic recession, and climate change to name but a few).

Through such means the media has undoubtedly had real success in influencing government policy. Constant media pressure (through the mass coverage of immigration-related issues) has undeniably influenced governmental popularity and policy.

The real issue is that many people living in Britain today gain their knowledge of immigration through these stories, rather than any personal experience or hard facts. Never, for example, is the fact that ethnic minorities (let alone immigrants, which would be a smaller number than this) represent approximately 7% of the UK population. Far from being ‘swamped’ by immigrants, this country still possesses massive cultural and ethnic uniformity. However, this piece is not designed to dispel all of the distasteful and untrue myths about immigrants, asylum seekers and foreigners in general. All that is recommended is that the reader should make attempts to go beyond the normal media sources when attempting to find out the ‘truth’. Only when this is achieved can this rather trivial issue be subsumed within the context of the larger and more pressing concerns that the United Kingdom will face in the future.

By Rex McGee

‘

Politics

Politicians will mention immigration and talk of measures taken to stem the ‘tide’ and strengthen the ‘borders’: figures acting as a smokescreen, to illustrate that politicians are doing something (or the ‘something’ that the other party is not doing). Immigration becomes a farce, a tragic one in which people see men and women scurrying for lorries at the French channel ports like ants on their TV or hear of scurvy breaking out in the new cardboard cities of the French coast. One where people say ‘they are coming to take our jobs,’ jobs they would never consider doing. One where you see pictures of a family killed in a cramped high rise blaze or of a gang swept out to sea whilst picking cockles. One where the far right sneak in where no one is looking, on the estate no one goes to, the high street where every other shop is closed, the factory facing closure; a snivelling, beaten man pouring out his tirade of hate. One where, in the cold, unheated room your forgotten Great Aunt Mabel thinks ‘At least he cares; at least he notices it never used to be like this.’ Immigration is not a farce, not just an exciting headline, not a set of figures: it is here, it is now and it is changing Britain.

by Christopher Wilford

Make no mistake: The regulation of our borders is an unavoidable reality. Change should be managed to an extent, but immigration should be seen as a force for good that needs regulating, rather than as a scourge that needs limiting. This distinction is more than just semantics. Travesties occur as a direct result of the way we think about our borders. It is all too often argued that the success of the BNP is due to open borders. Instead, the root of the BNP problem is our back-to-front conceptualisation of immigration. Unfortunately, however, when it comes to immigration, old myths die hard.

by Oliver Wiseman

The government must seek to reassure and listen to the public who feel they are voiceless and address the burden of immigration costs which fall on the poorest — who already face an unenviable struggle. By addressing the issues of youth unemployment, poor skills, a fair minimum wage and the housing shortage, the government would deprive the BNP of its voting source. A coherent border strategy, investment in the border agency and a more planned system of migration is also needed to reassure the public. To do otherwise would lead to further escalation of tensions and hostility, increase the support of the far right and lead to an emphasising of what divides us, rather than the many things that unite us.

by Danny Beales

‘

‘

‘

ANDREW JACKSONis a photographer and lecturer based in Birmingham. Having studied documentary photography for much of his academic life, Jackson seeks to document contemporary human existence in his work. In The Golden Road, the photographer focuses on the changes to geographical and psychological space as experienced by economic migrants to Britain. The following interview endeavours to uncover what motivated this particular exhibition, as well as Jackson’s thoughts on immigration more broadly.

The Golden Road by Andrew Jackson

11 January - 13 FebruaryLSE Atrium Gallery

Old BuildingMonday - Friday

10am - 8pm

1: Why documentary photography?

Well, firstly, I’d question whether I am indeed a documentary photographer or not, as I’m not really sure what that term means any more. I hate the labels that photography places on itself…documentary…fine art…these self imposed labels that suggest hierarchies of practice; it’s all just photography.

In terms of how most people perceive documentary photography - I’m not really on a quest to construct polemics or instruct anyone on how they should see any particular issue. There are no monolithic truths out there, just multiple realities, of which I – like everyone else – am just selecting one and presenting it in the guise of my story. But, granted, at one point I did believe in the truth and fact giving powers of documentary photography.

What drew me initially to documentary photography, early in my career, was I think a combination of being both an overly inquisitive child and growing up in a home where the news and documentaries were religiously observed and where politics was openly discussed.

No doubt because of this, I was always interested in finding out more about the world. I always had a desire to be able to see behind the scenes and find out more about the lives of others around me. But it wasn’t until I saw the photographic work of Nick Hedges – who had many years previously produced a body of work, entitled born to work – that I realised that photography could be used in ways to examine the issues that I too was interested in exploring.

2: What makes an Andrew Jackson photograph?

I’ve been told that my images are ‘quiet images’; initially this upset me, but in time this is a label that I’m quite pleased with. I consciously aim for this now, a sense of stillness and calmness that I use as a device to evoke a sense of introspection – especially within my images of people. I also see them as reflective mid points – ‘pregnant pauses’ – between situations that have occurred prior to the creation of the image and situations that are yet to occur.

I consciously want people to start asking themselves; What is

happening? What does this mean? In this sense, I see my images more as a device to open dialogues and ask questions rather than provide answers.

3: How did The Golden Road come about?

Like most works it came about by a chance encounter. I’d been interested in producing a series that explored economic migration for quite some time, and then, purely by chance, met the subject at the centre of the photographs and short film who agreed to be involved in my work.

She was very gracious with her time, and as the body of work developed I produced a series of portraits of her and her family, who had come over from Slovakia for her wedding. But increasingly I felt uneasy about making her and her family visible within the work (she is heard but not seen in the film) as I didn’t want to end up ‘objectifying’ her as a symbol of migration, but also felt that I wanted to use her experiences, and indeed spaces, more as a metaphor for what I consider to be quite universal experiences amongst those who have experienced migration.

4: What are you trying to achieve with this particular photographic exhibition?

What am I trying to achieve in this work? Well, my intention – within all my works – is to open up a window of discussion and establish a series of dialogues concerning the subject under scrutiny, in this case economic migration.

It’s not my intention to engage upon some great moral crusade or to attempt to persuade individuals to

take one side over the other, if anything I’m producing this work, as mentioned before, to open the discussion, but perhaps mainly to find answers for myself from this work. If in doing this it causes other people to begin questioning the issue within themselves, well all the better.

5: How have your personal experiences influenced your work?

The work that I do is ultimately always about me and of course my view on the world. But my interest, specifically in terms of this work, stems from the fact that I myself am the son of economic migrants; in this case from the Caribbean, who came to this country – or should I say were welcomed with open arms to this country – to help rebuild the ‘Motherland’ after the catastrophic affects of six years of war.

I believe that the issues facing migrants, whether they are labelled as ‘economic’ or ‘impelled’, or whether they are seen as ‘traditional’ or ‘new migrants’, well, the universal affects upon the transitional self, caught as it is, between their changing geographical and psychological space appears the same.

And so the same sense of dislocation that my parents felt, and the feelings of seeing their identities lost somewhere between who they were in their home country and who they are attempting to be in their host country – and the resulting sense of lack from this, is the same for those coming from Eastern Europe in 2009, just as it was for my parents so many years before.

INTERVIEW by Annalise Toberman

I want people to start asking themselves; what is happening?

Ident i t yFebruary 14th 1983, Erdington High Street, Birmingham. My parents, two first generation immigrants, have just opened their first pharmacy. On the whole, business is slow, but the bell above the door rings and a young boy comes in to do a bit of shopping. My mother watches him struggle from shelf to shelf, clutching a scrunched up and almost incoherently scribbled shopping list. He’s totally lost so she proceeds to help him, taking the list and scanning down it to see a number of familiar items which she promptly picks out for him. Getting to the bottom of the list she sees an underlined message: ‘Make sure you go to the “Paki” shop!’

My parents tell this story and laugh. While I can see the funny side, having been brought up in a genuinely multicultural society, it makes me squirm a little. I think back to times before and after the Race Relations Act 1976 when immigrant communities suffered at the hands of the ignorant, the racist and the xenophobic. When my mother came to England as a toddler in the 1960s, there was a genuine problem with ‘skinheads’ and ‘teddy-boys’. I hear stories of her family having to cross the road when they saw such characters coming in their direction, of name-calling at school and of being concerned for the safety of their business. Having very rarely experienced (direct) racism in my life, I shudder to think about the treatment immigrants back then received.

My mother vividly remembers her first day at school here. Only four years old, she was kicked in the shins by a fellow pupil, who then called her a ‘Paki’. Ironically enough, this bully was black, but it certainly wasn’t the warmest welcome to England and things weren’t any easier for adults either. Birmingham in the late 1950s and early 1960s had reasonably large immigrant communities, who had come to the Midlands from Commonwealth countries to fill a void in the labour force. For a lot of families, this meant that their entry into England was staggered. Both of my granddads came to this country a number of years before their wives and children (for my paternal grandfather this meant going eleven years without seeing his family), and tried to establish themselves before they could bring their families over.

For my maternal grandfather who immigrated in 1962, the transition was reasonably smooth. As an engineer he was very employable in the industrial heartland of England and it wasn’t long before the family were reunited in the suburb of Walsall in 1965. My paternal grandfather lengthened his CV by working his way through a number of jobs, including being a bus conductor and working in various factories, before eventually becoming a factory foreman and settling in Slade Road, Erdington. While the industrial working class were generally accepting of these young immigrant men, there remained a ceiling on the kind of jobs they could get and it often took exceptional talent to rise up the ranks. Continued on next page

Swings,

Roundabouts,

Bandwagons,

Fear and

Irrationality

Since Labour came into power in 1997 immigration has reached levelS incomparable to any figure in recent centuries. The Times recently reported that Labour had deliberately told immigration officials to overlook borderline migrant cases (Minette Marrin 01/11/09). This insidious approach was also an abrogation of duty; there were several thousand unemployed in Britain that may have lost job opportunities or the resources to create business (such as credit). It is hardly surprising that so many of those struggling to get on the social ladder voted for the BNP in the European Elections this year.

However, immigration controls are not just there to prevent the abuse of resources, but also to protect culture. To protect our culture, rates of assimilation is relevant. The post-Enlightenment rational approach to society, education and politik is not only uniquely Western, but is more uniquely British. Victorian liberal values of toleration, including not censoring speech that others might want to hear because of selfish sensitivities, took time to absorb and become mainstream social norms. The idea of free discussion for national interest in politics that formed the key to Parliamentary democracy was first developed in Britain as a result of post-reformation progress based on individual reason. British culture, which is intrinsically humanist, is not everyone’s cup of tea. It is a product of a rare formation of myriad factors that makes it difficult for any foreigner to digest. Few that arrive will pick up copies of Macaulay, Dryden or any abridged account of our culture. Often it is not just the comparative poor literacy among migrants that is the issue, but rather their cultural traditions, based often in superstition,

Effective border controls could protect our culture.

It is in this context that I can see why my parents may find the ‘Paki shop’ story funnier than me; experiencing ignorance and racism in such a tame form reminded them of how much better things had become. Gone were the days of having to cross the road when some ‘red-laces’ were walking past, and in the twenty years since their arrival such explicit signs of racism had almost disappeared from society; the National Front were now a smaller band of loonies, skinheads and teddy-boys, and people had clocked on that Enoch probably wasn’t right. The child was told he must go to the ’Paki’ shop rather than throw a brick through its window.

The kind of discrimination that my parents experienced generally drove them to work harder. The same can be said for today’s immigrants: even in the face of adversity and discrimination immigrant workers strive to prove a point and to be able to build a future for their families.

Recently my dad and I went to the shops to pick up some odds and ends, and outside there was a group of what can only be called ‘chavs’ sitting on their bikes. As I walked past, one said to the rest, ‘These terrorists sure do make a lot of money, don’t they?’ which they all found hilarious. We found it funny as well. If you’re not a benefit scrounger then you’re stealing all the British jobs, and if you’re doing well then you’re just a terrorist with money. How much should this bother first and second generation immigrants? Not much really. If the ignorant put in half as much effort into achieving something as they do airing their prejudices, they would certainly be doing a lot better in life. As for new immigrants, they’re just going to work hard and actually make something of their lives. The areas in which immigrant communities settled in the 1960s are where modern immigrants live now, and there is a clear cycle of starting off in these poor communities and then working their way out; at least in Birmingham. As for our chavs outside Co-op, they were there forty years ago and are here now, and it doesn’t look like they’re going to grow up any time soon.

by adhUV prinja

Effective border controls could protect our culture.

that are incompatible with the intellectual rigor that British cultural integration requires. The indigenous common man does not have such a problem, as great British thinking filtered down socially, is his. There is also the issue of will and motivation amongst some, though not all, newcomers. Once migrants are here, they often do not wish to jump several hundred years of history and assimilate. Thus immigration controls need to be in the hundreds, with rigorous testing designed to determine cultural assimilation, rather than in the thousands or tens of thousands that politicians arbitrarily claim.

For those who are already here, accepting freedom and individual responsibility in a liberal society is tough and scary. People need to come out of their foreign cultural shells and embrace British plurality. Language and lack of local knowledge are huge barriers. Assimilation can only effectively work through direct personal contact, when others have time to give to foreigners. Huge numbers of migrants will not make this possible. They will alienate most people from indigenous folk who are aware of important nuances of local history and society.

Political correctness and multiculturalism do not help assimilation either. Developing states all aspire to market-liberalism and freedom of society, yet multiculturalism denies all the important cultural aspects that go into allowing this, to migrants in the UK. It fetters assimilation, which has already been made so difficult by the huge swathes of foreign folk that now swamp the concrete social housing ghettoes of inner cities. Worst of all multiculturalism was disguised as a moral approach, whereas in reality it was an abnegation of social and governmental responsibility to asimilate migrants. When huge numbers of those with foreign culture

(not race as the BNP have tried to blame) are given votes, they can work to operate against the British cultural value of toleration. Without assimilation their primary affinity may also be with their state of provenance. This means that they may be willing to vote for measures or people who have interests other than Britain’s at heart. This may be particularly acute in the field of foreign policy, as the 2005 electoral success of George Galloway showed.

Lack of willingness to compel assimilation is also a result of a maligned understanding of the global contribution of British culture. The Nehrus and Gandhis of this world were created through the post-enlightenment British education method. Political activists for rights, such as Mandela, had found their values from their education in both Anglican Christianity and post-Enlightenment English Common Law. The victory over the closed autocracy of communism of the Soviets was predominantly based on two key Enlightenment philosophers: John Locke (who conceived the importance of protecting private property rights) and Adam Smith (whose work placed effective resource usage into the process of government). Many immigrants from less developed countries have little appreciation of the importance of upholding contracts and how a rule of law state operates. The difficulties of bringing the idea of individual responsibility and institutional accountability to the developing world is something with which those who work in the field of law and development are all too familiar. All these problems are too quickly overlooked in Parliament. Time is pressing. The time is now here to put our culture back at the heart of our nation, and to ensure that immigration numbers are curbed significantly to protect it. Or else we are at risk of not losing who we are, but the essence of all we are.

by Abhijit PG Pandya

‘What about Britishness?’ rants an older, whiter generation. It is claimed that nowadays ‘our’ identity and culture is drowned out by the practices of immigrant communities. As obvious as it may sound, it is all too often forgotten that cultures, and thus identities, change. For thousands of years, the UK has experienced flows of different ethnic groups in and out. Our people, our society, and our culture are mongrel: an amalgam of countless influences. To try to halt the natural progression of this rich, diverse and complicated culture would be to leave everyone worse off.

Ideas of English language requirements and citizenship tests, however mocked, are positive steps. Ensuring that all people in Britain are able to speak a common language is essential. As the German philosopher Herder asserted in the eighteenth century, ‘With language is created the heart of a people’. Many often see such calls as irrational, dangerous, and divisive, or as pandering to the right and racism. But this argument is fundamentally short-sighted and misplaced. Herder, and many like him, are not stressing the virtues of one culture, language of ethnicity over another; they are asserting that language provides an essential unifying factor for a multi-cultural society. To not encourage immigrants to adopt the English tongue is to enshrine difference and emphasise it further, with truly dangerous and damaging consequences.

The myth of Britain is that it is a stable rock rather than a site of continual, dynamic change. We are a landscape, we are a history, we are a heritage, yet we are also a flow: a river of people, ideas and wealth. Churchill knew this; the Greatest Briton himself was half-American. He knew that Britain was an idea: the intangible flame as well as the tangible woods, dales and tarns. In one of the most fateful discussions in this island’s history, Lord Halifax argued Britain should surrender to avoid Nazi jackboots traipsing through his beloved Yorkshire Dales. Churchill, amongst the greenery of the Number 10 garden, said no. The Yorkshire dales are dales; the ideas, common law and heritage behind them make them The Yorkshire Dales. Britain is an idea and it is freedom; it is an evolutionary fable and therein lies its strength and the key to its continued success.

by Christopher Wilfordby danny beales

by Oliver Wiseman

--------------- Clare+ Perspectives on Immigration, January 2010 ---------------

Editor-in-Chief: Sean Baker + Special Projects Editor: Annalise Toberman Production Editor: Eric King + Creative Directors: Meredith Bailey and Lydia Sprenger + Editors: Rena Barch and Katie Rowland + Copy Editors: Dave Randall, John deGraft-Johnson, Amelia Iuvino and Kwaku Awaku-Asabre + Web EditorAlexandra Kane + Development Managers: Daniella Lock and Paul McQueen

--------- su.claremarketreview@lse.ac.uk -------- www.claremarketreview.com ---------

Just economics and politics? Think again. While LSE does not teach arts

or music, there is a vibrant cultural side to the School - from weekly free music concerts in the Shaw Library, and an LSE orchestra and choir with their own professional conductors, film, art and photographic student societies, and artist-in-residence projects.

There are many works of art around the School and its residences. Explore LSE’s arts and music and discover the School’s cultural talent and diversity.

‘

The Golden Road by Andrew JacksonMonday 11 January - Saturday 13 FebruaryMonday to Friday, 10am-8pmAtrium Gallery, Old Building

The Making of The Golden Road:Andrew JacksonWednesday 20 January6.30pm-8pmShaw Library, Old Building

Short films by Andrew Jackson: Fire and No Work/No CakeWednesday 10 February6.30pm-8pmWolfson Theatre, NAB

Exhibition supported by Arts Council England & Harvard International PLC