Discussions of migration in Britain often portray immigrants as “invaders”. This is evident in the narrative around migrants arriving on small boats, to recent comments by Jim Ratcliffe, the billionaire co-owner of Manchester United.
Ratcliffe, who relocated to the tax haven of Monaco in 2020, blamed immigrants for the country’s economic challenges and claimed the UK had been “colonised”. After a public backlash, he apologised “that his choice of language has offended some people”.
A look at the history of immigration policy and rhetoric shows how this narrative came to play such a big role – and why it is so harmful.
Britain’s history is intertwined with empire and colonialism. The UK was forged as a nation-state alongside, and partly to facilitate, the growth of a global empire sustained through violence, brutality and war. It also led to immigration from Britain’s current and former colonies.
Although empire-related immigration began hundreds of years earlier, it accelerated after the second world war. Thousands of workers were recruited from the Caribbean and south Asia, as well as from Ireland and continental Europe, to relieve labour shortages and help staff the newly-formed National Health Service.
The 1948 British Nationality Act essentially allowed the entry of all subjects of the British empire. However, this did not reflect widespread acceptance of mass immigration. Rather, it was an attempt to maintain control over Britain’s colonial...
from Scroll.in https://scroll.in/article/1090948/uk-the-racist-history-of-how-immigrants-came-to-be-branded-as-invaders-colonisers?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=public https://sc0.blr1.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/article/212114-kghpnqrdok-1771852148.jpg
via
0 Comments