From mob violence to a new model Britain

Britain faces a serious social crisis. It’s not, as anti-immigrant puppet-masters or “influencers” would have us believe, on the verge of a general uprising, let alone Elon Musk’s “civil war”. But neither are the events of the past 10 days trivial, incidental or isolated. They merit a serious, long-term response.

The immediate rejoinder must be to contain the lawlessness, bring the criminals to justice and identify those egging them on. But something bolder, wider, deeper is needed.

The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, has so far resisted recalling Parliament. He would prefer the riots to be treated as a criminal matter and for the law to take its course. Yet he describes the mobs as far-Right thugs, pinning a political label to them. The contradiction is obvious. And therein lies the dilemma.

Immigration is an issue that has festered in a kind of conversational limbo ever since Enoch Powell’s “rivers of blood” speech in 1968.  It’s either too sensitive to discuss honestly, for fear of offending liberal sensibilities and ethnic minorities, or it’s used as a cattle prod by the Right to whip up resentment for political advantage. Immigration was the weeping wound at the heart of Brexit. Taking back control of Britain’s borders was wielded to great effect by Leavers to harvest support in working-class communities. Yet the case for immigration as a net positive was never properly made.

Migration – the mass movement of people – is one of the defining issues of the past 75 or so years for Western democracies. Immigrant communities who came to Britain after 1945 brought enterprise, variety and sparkle to their adoptive country, then exhausted by war. The 2021 census showed that nearly 10 million people resident in the UK were born abroad. I’m one. 

By and large, Britain integrates its immigrants well. The trend, in most (but obviously not all) parts of Britain is towards an ever more accepting attitude to migrants. 

But we would be foolish to deny that mass migration has also injected a potential for friction, which has spread, mostly beneath the surface in whispers and angry glances, especially in communities that feel left behind. 

Britain also  needs time to absorb and integrate the huge number of immigrants and their immediate descendants who are already living in the nation’s towns and cities. This is a challenge that cannot be ignored.

This has now burst to the surface. The proximate cause is the relatively small but highly visible cohort of refugees piling into small boats to reach England. They have become the lightning rod for a wider issue of critical importance. It deserves an open and honest national conversation.

To be clear: attempting to burn down a hotel full of asylum seekers, a mosque, or a children’s library, or looting shops or beating up people of colour in the street, is not a “protest”. Public protest, like free speech, is an essential component of democracy. Setting fire to things because you don’t like foreigners or ethnic minorities is not OK. That’s called racism and arson. The perpetrators are not protestors. They’re hooligans, or worse. 

Nevertheless, the violence sweeping Britain is tearing at its social fabric. Once again, the UK presents a dysfunctional face to the world. Forces, both within and outside Britain, that are up to no good, or wish us ill, have thrown their algorithms into the mix stirring the pot.

The false claim that a Muslim youth was responsible for a killing spree at a dance class in Southport where three little girls died and many others were wounded received 27 million hits on social media. Nigel Farage MP, Reform’s leader, took a bellows to the flames by asking whether the police were “withholding the truth from us”. Arsonists work in the dark and wildfire spreads fast.

It’s worth asking the question whether labelling these riots as far-Right is helpful. Labels define us without the heavy lifting of critical thinking. Those, like the English Defence League (EDL) or its offshoots and hangers on, have no policies, no arguments and no goals other than the irrational idea of “taking back our country”. Bare-chested youths smashing shop windows and coming away with looted after-shave lotion are not making a political statement.

Nevertheless, something serious is going on that merits consideration beyond the courts. Britain has grappled with the challenges posed by large-scale immigration for decades. We’ve introduced race laws, hate laws and entire libraries of guidance on how to be good citizens around the issue. Yet the vicious circle doesn’t stop spinning.

There is hope. In 1981 tension between the black community and police in Toxteth, inner-city Liverpool, erupted into uncontrolled violence. Sir Geoffrey Howe, Margaret Thatcher’s Chancellor, shockingly advocated abandoning the city to “managed decline”. Instead, Mrs Thatcher sent Michael (now Lord) Heseltine to see what he could do. As Environment Secretary he oversaw a huge regeneration plan, which transformed the city from a derelict pile to one of Europe’s most vibrant and successful port-cities. In 2012 the Labour council awarded him the freedom of the city which, Heseltine says, “brought tears to my eyes”.

A telling moment amid the ugly scenes of the past 10 days was when, brooms, shovels and trowels in hand, local residents of Southport (including a policewoman in uniform) helped repair the damage to the town’s mosque. This moment of solidarity between faiths and races, replicated in other riot-hit cities, contains the seeds of a way forward.

Extremism is a multi-headed hydra. It thrives in a toxic fog of anger, despair and opportunism. It feeds off individual grievance, cynically manipulated by men of dubious integrity such as Elon Musk, owner of X (formerly Twitter), Russian propagandists and British MPs who know better but couldn’t care less. The Tory Right and Reform UK have been especially irresponsible. 

If there is a remedy in the long-term, it lies not, primarily, with government, but in our communities. A central plank of the Labour project is to devolve power away from Westminster and London-based quangos to communities where people are best placed to see what needs doing.

This should be matched and encouraged with a devolution of public debate, where citizens can address these complex issues face to face. One model was Ireland’s Citizens’ Assembly which overcame decades of deep-seated disagreement over abortion and gay rights.

Citizens’ Assemblies are not a panacea. A randomly selected 100-200 citizens to reflect age, religion, wealth and education does not guarantee they represent the public as a whole. And Ireland is a much smaller country. 

But the idea of opening up the issue beyond Westminster provides a starting point. A wider debate in our regions in mosques and churches, community halls, Women’s Institutes and public libraries could pave the way for a healthier country. 

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.