logo
Who cares that Britain is on course to be ‘minority white'?

Who cares that Britain is on course to be ‘minority white'?

Gulf Today2 days ago

Anand Menon,
The Independent
Language is a funny thing. This week, a new report appeared to warn that the white British population could be a minority in the UK within 40 years. And it has brought out the worst in some of us. An analysis of migration, birth and death rates by the University of Buckingham suggests the white British population is set to fall from its current 73 per cent, to 57 per cent by 2050, before becoming a minority by 2063. One newspaper's report explained, rather curiously, that white British is 'defined as people who do not have an immigrant parent'. Bad luck, then, all you non-white kids of an Irish, French or German parent. Unlucky, too, King Charles, Winston Churchill and Boris Johnson. By this metric, it seems that you no longer qualify as white British.
Beyond this rank stupidity, there is of course something else going on here. This is less dog whistle than plain old whistle. Dodgy extrapolations posing as predictions. Few people are spared. We're informed, presumably with some regret, that there is going to be a rise in the number of foreign-born people and of second-generation immigrants, all of whom could well be British. Further on, Matthew Goodwin, the author of the report, shifts the goalposts one more time, asserting that by 'the end of the current century, most of the people on these islands will not be able to trace their roots in this country back more than one or two generations'.
And then, of course, we have the equating of 'foreign-born and Muslim populations', implying, presumably, that if you're Muslim, you just don't cut it wherever you happen to have been born. If the problem that this country simply isn't white enough, someone may as well just come out and say it. Because it's clear the issue here isn't Britishness. There is a serious debate to be had not only about immigration, but also about integration. Happily, the country that most of us inhabit is a place where both ethnic and religious integration is a daily reality for millions of families, including my own. While I think we in the UK do rather better at this than many of our Western peers, there is still more that can and should be done. There is also a conversation worth having about what a manageable level of immigration might be, and whether immigration policy is fit for purpose.
This, however, is not the way to have those conversations. Indeed, potentially inciting distrust and dislike between different communities is not how anyone sensible would go about, in the words of the report itself, 'informing, rather than polarising'. That is the only conclusion that I can draw from their sloppiness. If, after all, their aim really was to 'inform, rather than polarise', they might spend more time explaining that forecasts are not predictions. They might explain that there is good evidence that the total fertility rate among immigrants tends to fall over time. That the population projections Goodwin has used — calculations based on assumptions about fertility, mortality and migration — are already massively outdated, and become even less reliable the further forward one projects. But no, there is no such nuance to be found. Merely certainty that the findings are certain to spark a 'considerable degree of anxiety, concern and political opposition' from those who oppose immigration.
And let's think about this in a global context for a moment. The world is changing, its balance of power is shifting steadily eastwards. Demographically — and I'm sorry about this — it is becoming less, not more, white. Relatively small countries like the UK will have to work ever harder to compete and to attract talent in this new world order. Do we really think that bemoaning the insidious impact of non-white foreigners who cannot trace their ancestry back several generations is going to help us in this task? But what I do know is that I'm not only not white, but apparently not British, either.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What to know about the new Trump travel ban now in effect
What to know about the new Trump travel ban now in effect

Middle East Eye

time11 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

What to know about the new Trump travel ban now in effect

US President Donald Trump's new travel ban went into effect on Monday, to far less mobilisation and criticism than the first time around, in 2017. With a bigger mandate this time, and relatively high approval ratings for his immigration policy, Trump's new travel ban has not just expanded, it's also on far more solid legal footing, immigration lawyers told Middle East Eye. The executive order targets 12 countries: Afghanistan; Burma; Chad; the Republic of the Congo; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Haiti; Iran; Libya; Somalia; Sudan; and Yemen. Additionally, nationals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela will be partially restricted. Those already inside the US are exempt. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters For those abroad at the time the ban went into effect, they may enter the country if they are green card holders, preauthorised visa holders, preauthorised refugee claimants, dual citizens where one of the countries is not included in the travel ban, or if they are the immediate family members of a US citizen. Still, increased scrutiny at ports of entry and orders from Secretary of State Marco Rubio could lead to visa revocations by a border agent. The administration has made it clear that no person is entitled to entry into the US, apart from US citizens. The White House said the ban, as well as heightened vetting measures, is necessary because of excessive visa overstays, which the Trump administration says is a national security concern because it could lead to "terrorist" activity. 'We don't want them': countries facing travel ban to US Read More » The ban was initially expected back in March, but was only introduced following an attack by an Egyptian national on a pro-Israeli march in Colorado last week. "This is definitely a Muslim ban couched in language that the Trump administration knows how to get around as it pertains to the courts," Haris Tarin, the vice president of policy and programming at the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), told MEE. "There was a lot of online chatter - especially by the Laura Loomers and the Randy Fines - these intense Islamophobes in Congress and supporters of the administration who basically said Muslims are responsible for this, and that they needed to ban the Muslim Brotherhood and that they needed to have travel bans," he added. The administration "already spooked so many people from coming into this country... with the detention of students, with the detention of tourists," Tarin said. "This was the perfect time to go even further." 'Anxious, desperate, exhausted' Unlike the 2017 ban, this one is likely to remain in effect in its current form, Hassan M Ahmed, managing attorney at the HMA Law Firm, told MEE. "It's clear that a lot more thought went into this version of it. It seems that they learned their lessons from the previous iterations," Ahmed said, referring to the persistent challenges they faced in court. In a precedent-setting decision in late 2017, the US Supreme Court maintained that the president did not violate the First Amendment with his so-called Muslim Ban, and was well within his rights to determine what is in the national security interest. The Court also said there was no anti-Muslim animus in the ban, simply because many other Muslim countries were not targeted. "Anytime a policy changes, whether for good or for bad, we get an increase in phone calls," Ahmed said. "In this case, we're dealing not just with a change in policy, but there's sort of a psychological aspect to a lot of the administration's offensive policies, and that creates a great deal of uncertainty." On those phone calls are people who are "anxious, desperate, and exhausted", Ahmed told MEE. "Unfortunately, given the track record of open defiance of court orders and lawlessness that's become sort of emblematic of this administration, sometimes we as lawyers are at a loss [and unable] to tell clients that they don't have anything to worry about." Laila Ayub, an immigration attorney and co-founder of Project ANAR, which assists in the resettlement of Afghan refugees, said the climate of fear is deeply pervasive among the community she works with. "Everyone who's already here started contacting us, thinking they're now at risk of deportation just because of their nationality, which is not actually the reality," Ayub told MEE. "So there is a lot of opportunity still to empower people with information about their rights." "The number one question, though, that people have always despite their situation when they are in here in the US, is when they can reunite with their family. That is really something that will be impacted by the travel ban." Impact on visas While advocacy groups have been pleading with the Trump administration for months to make an exemption for Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans who aided American soldiers between 2001 and 2021, there is such a carveout. Still, the visa does not include everyone who worked for or who worked closely with the US during their presence in Afghanistan, Ayub said. Mirriam Sediq, who runs Seddiq Law Maryland, told MEE that previously "lawful categories for Afghans" now suddenly no longer exist. "There are people that came to the US in 2021, 2022 through humanitarian parole. There are also those who have [Temporary Protected Status]. And TPS has been ended for Afghans, so they're really left in a completely no man's land right now." Handful of US lawmakers demand Trump ban the Muslim Brotherhood Read More » Seddiq said she feels "super betrayed by this idea that we've told our clients to do [the right] things" in terms of entering legally and maintaining a law-abiding presence, yet "they're walking directly into the lion's den when they do it". Among other actions, the Trump administration has sent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to courthouses around the country to arrest largely undocumented immigrants who are appearing for their immigration court date, just as the government asked them to. This, Seddiq said, was always standard practice: as long as an immigrant did regular check-ins with ICE agents and showed up in front of a judge and violated no laws, they could carry on with their lives in the US. Now, they're being taken away from their US-born children to be detained and then deported. "We've allowed people to enter even when they don't have a pathway forward. And this is where we are," Seddiq told MEE. "But we've been here for decades and decades and decades, and we've asked for major immigration reform, major overhauls, maybe even some sort of amnesty for people who are doing all the right things. And there's never the political will to do it." Legislative change Despite a much more muted societal reaction compared to 2017, civil liberties groups and immigrant advocacy organisations are working on ways to respond to the new Trump travel ban. The public that took to the streets eight years ago is simply too exhausted this time, Tarin told MEE. "People have been responding to students being kidnapped off the streets by ICE. People have been mobilising to try to support students on student visas. Lawyers have tried to mobilise around protecting students on college campuses," he said. But that's also a strategy the administration has employed. "The way advocates organise is they take one issue at a time and they organise around it, and that's how they're successful. And so if you throw 15 issues at them, they won't be able to respond," Tarin said. In the immediate term, MPAC is putting together a network of lawyers that can be accessed in case of emergencies where otherwise legal entrants to the US are stuck at airports or put into detention. However, the group is also eyeing the 2026 midterm elections, when members of the House and Senate will be up for reelection, and Democrats may stand a chance of gaining a majority of seats in both chambers. MPAC is pushing for traction on the NO BAN Act so that if Democrats take control of Congress, there is an opportunity to make the bill a law. The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in February by Democratic Congresswoman Judy Chu of California. It aims to limit Trump's authority to ban an entire class of foreigners - or "aliens" as they are called in the US - from arriving in the country, and demands that Rubio provide lawmakers with reports on the number of denied visitors. For the time being, people will "always try" to come to the US anyway, Seddiq said. "I am loath to tell anybody that the United States is closed the way the administration wants to seemingly advertise to the world. I think that where there's a will, there's a way, and frequently, when you're dealing with immigration, the key to success is merely standing up one more time when you're knocked down," Ahmed said.

Leader of left-leaning French party says country must recognise Palestinian state
Leader of left-leaning French party says country must recognise Palestinian state

Middle East Eye

time14 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Leader of left-leaning French party says country must recognise Palestinian state

The leader of the left-leaning Le France Insoumise party, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, said the siege on Gaza must be lifted, reported Al Jazeera Arabic on Monday. Melenchon also said France must immediately recognise a Palestinian state to thwart Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu's war on Gaza. He added that the French government allows Netanyahu to do whatever he wants, and he [Melenchin] refuses to bow down to him. He also said that Israel had committed piracy on Monday morning in international waters by detaining everybody on board a ship carrying humanitarian aid. He commended the bravery of the crew on board, which includes climate and political activist Greta Thunberg and a member of the European Parliament, Rima Hassan.

Protestors lobby UK government for release of charity ship crew detained by Israel
Protestors lobby UK government for release of charity ship crew detained by Israel

Middle East Eye

time14 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Protestors lobby UK government for release of charity ship crew detained by Israel

People have been protesting outside the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in London on Monday to demand that the government secure the release of all 12 unarmed crew members on board a boat with humanitarian aid bound for the Gaza Strip. The crew, including Swedish climate and political activist Greta Thunberg, were in international waters at the time the boat - named the Madleen after the first fisherwoman in Gaza - was stormed by Israelis in the early hours of Monday morning. Protestors are arguing that the raid was illegal as the boat was sailing in international waters and that, under international maritime law, the UK has full jurisdiction over the vessel and a legal duty to protect the crew as the boat is British-flagged.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store