Dr Martin Luther King Jr urged that people should ‘not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character’. This admonition is fine in theory, but may encounter problems in practice. The main barrier is that people of different races are likely also to belong to separate cultures and religions, or speak different languages, so creating hurdles to communication. In addition, like it or not, most people instinctively tend to identify with others of the same racial group, thereby forming their own sense of community. So the fight against ‘racism’ is one that is unlikely to ever be achieved, as it appears to be against human nature, and this factor needs to be recognised if the problems associated with race are to be properly addressed.
It should be remembered that any racial problems created in this country have been caused, not by ordinary British people, but by past Conservative and Labour governments who permitted, and sometimes encouraged, the influx of large numbers of people of different races, despite warnings about the many problems this policy would likely bring. So lectures from politicians on the casual ‘racism’ of some working class white people should be treated with the contempt they deserve, since they as a class, not the public, created the problem in the first place. The blame for this situation should not be placed on immigrants either, since they were motivated by a desire to improve their standard of living and life prospects.
Those white liberals who are the most vocal in their condemnation of ‘racism’ are rarely inspired by a genuine interest in the welfare of black people. Their motivation instead is mostly a desire to parade their moral superiority, to indulge in a cheap and facile public demonstration of what has come to be known as virtue signalling. As a consequence, such posturing has for decades had a most pernicious effect, as the accusation of ‘racism’ has struck fear into the whole political class, including Conservatives.
The end result is that politicians have failed to tackle, or even address, the continuing chain migration that has allowed whole swathes of British cities such as London. Manchester, Birmingham, Leicester, Bradford and others, to become subject to the slow motion ethnic cleansing of their indigenous white British residents, replaced in turn by people of Asian, African or West Indian descent, whose main loyalty for many of them, is to their own communities and not to British society as a whole.
The effects of this damaging change have been highlighted in government reports and TV programmes about parallel communities leading separate lives within the same towns. Ethnic concentrations and white flight reflect the impact such divisions have made on the British nation. Although a minority of people of ethnic background do their best to assimilate into British society, a significant number make no attempt whatsoever, content to remain in their ethnic, cultural and religious ghettoes.
Given their wilful blindness you might expect that it would be politicians who would be condemned for allowing this situation to occur. But instead all the opprobrium has been directed at the ‘racists’ who have drawn attention to this open ended attack on the cohesion of British society. The current focus on identity politics by liberals, obsessing about the victimhood of black people, is only making matters worse, as well as alienating the white majority who, in their hearts and in their private conversations, do not share the outlook or priorities of the vocal anti-racists.
The problem may well be intractable but the most likely means of addressing it is by encouraging assimilation, and eschewing any preferential treatment or special pleading made on behalf of minorities. Surprisingly, the wisest response to the issue of ethnic immigration came from former Labour deputy leader Roy Hattersley who advised that 'without integration [having no] limitation is inexcusable; without limitation integration is impossible'.