On mass immigration as a phenomenon

While writing The Tribe I found two of my main interests, in the existential background to life and in mass immigration as a phenomenon, fusing and coming together in ways that I am still exploring and finding interesting.

I think this coming-together has helped me to address one of the fundamental questions of our time in the book, namely,

Why is mass immigration such a troubling phenomenon for ‘host’ communities or people?
Even using this word ‘phenomenon’, which I know annoys some people in its vagueness, helps to guide us towards the sort of answers I have been coming up with.

It helps because it does not limit how we address what is going on in the act of describing it. For one thing, it helps us to avoid locating the source of trouble in immigrants themselves, as if there is something wrong with them. But it also avoids locating the troubles in what I am calling here, for want of a better word, ‘host’ communities or people – as if there is something wrong with them.

Treating mass immigration as a phenomenon allows us to avoid committing ourselves to the fray on one side or another simply in the act of describing it. It may appear too broad and wide-ranging. But in being so, it allows us to include the full range of aspects which others do not consider; indeed how they seek to describe it can feature as part of what we are looking to describe.

This points towards one of the underlying themes of my book: that the way we interpret the world is part of the world we are looking to interpret – and must be taken into account if we are to see things accurately. The phenomenon of mass immigration includes how we interpret mass immigration and different aspects of it. It allows us to consider immigrants themselves as a block but also as individual people who have decided to move countries. It allows us to consider those who feel uncomfortable about immigration, but who do not convert that discomfort into hostility towards immigrants – and also those who do. It allows us to consider the role of pro-immigration activists and politicians. It allows us to consider how tabloids treat immigration in an often crude way, at least in their front pages – and how other news media have made it an issue in different ways, indeed sometimes primarily as a reaction to the tabloid treatment.

To allow all these considerations to exist is what addressing mass immigration as a phenomenon means in practice. It means seeing the world not as an object to be described in the same way we would describe objects, with fixed properties and easily-reached conclusions, but as a dynamic whole in which we are all participants and our participation is crucial to what is going on. It brings us towards the nature of social and political power, in which some participants are more important than others, and in which we can grab a piece of that power by aligning to it.

In The Tribe, I have written extensively about mass immigration in this way, as a phenomenon which is much wider and more interesting than our judgemental, rationalistic political discourse allows. Of course I’ve written about it principally in relation to liberal-left politics, because that’s what the book is all about. In doing so I’ve drawn out how these politics are often dubious and even dishonest, but also how they have been successful and looking at some of the consequences of this success – not least on working class people in the Unfavoured Groups chapter.

Sometimes looking over the book I’ve thought that maybe I’ve talked about immigration too much – at the expense of other issues. On the other hand though, I think it deserves this level of treatment. As one of the defining issues of our times, immigration remains little understood in public life. Hopefully, my book will help to change that a little bit.

The Tribe is now available for £12 (RRP £14.95) with free postage to UK addresses. Use coupon TRIBE at imprint.co.uk/tribe.

For more about the book, see my previous blogpost here.

Comments

  1. Anonymous19 July 2018 at 19:25

    Given that the mass immigration of the last twenty years, not to mention that of the post war era, has changed Britain and England in particular, more profoundly than at any point in its previous history, I don't see how you cannot write so much about it.

    Frankly, I am very open in saying that I think it has been an utter catastrophe. The post-war immigration was problematic enough introducing as it did race politics and new forms of crime. But the waves of the last twenty years have already started a non-violent civil war, and if Islam continues to grow and its associated atrocities of mass child rape, suicide bombings and gangsterism in Labour run locales do not abate then there will be a real civil war.

    And if you think I'm exaggerating, consider that three different Army officers have all told me that they regularly train for, in their words, 'the day it goes tits up with the Muslims'.

    One thing I find fascinating is why when the major Jewish organisations are up in arms about anti-semitism, does one a) not find them placing the blame where it really lies (Islam) and b) why they do not relent in their decades long support for mass immigration and multiculturalism.

    It has hard to have sympathy with organisations which have invited a problem on to themselves (though one which has barely impacted their lives compared to what its down to thousands of children in Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford, Oxford, Newcastle etc etc.) and yet don't have the guts to really reflect on their own role in that.

    Frankly, I think we are all in huge collective denial and at the same time, the political class is s###ing themselves about it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

All comments, however critical, will be accepted as long as they are not personal and/or abusive.

Popular posts from this blog

Schopenhauer on Hegel: "A flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan."

There's nothing like a good insult or two, and if you're looking for insults in philosophy, you need look no further than Arthur Schopenhauer's comments on his German contemporary, the much more popular and successful Friedrich Hegel.  Schopenhauer suggested as a motto of Hegel’s philosophy some words of Shakespeare: ‘s uch stuff as madmen tongue and brain not’. He added : " Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan, who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to ac...
Read more

Why Islamists and feminists avoid confronting each other

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of our system of diversity is the way feminists and Islamists avoid directly confronting each other. Their ideologies are utterly opposed to each other, but within the system they are allies, so maintain distance and attack others. We can see this in how feminists resolutely avoid picking up on specifically Islamic-related instances of actual misogyny and discrimination in action. They nearly always stick to generalities and abstractions about the world or society as a whole, as Fawcett Society chief executive Sam Smethers does in telling Owen Jones that , “We have a very misogynistic culture in the UK.” In this version of reality, there is a single culture – or at least all the cultures we have come from the same root - and it is ‘very misogynistic’. This is the ‘patriarchy’ theory that is remarkably popular in the upper echelons of the liberal-left, just as it is among young feminists coming out of their Gender Studies courses at universit...
Read more

Immigration: our public debate misses the main point

Our public debate on immigration in Britain almost always focuses entirely on money and thereby misses the main point, a point that our political-media class finds difficult to deal with and that many regard as almost illegitimate. This is how people feel . It is emblematic of the state of democracy in Britain that any sort of negative opinions about immigration routinely get shouted down and lambasted as ‘wrong’ by the siren voices of people and institutions, most of which are on the supposedly ‘liberal-left’ side of politics. It is particularly disturbing the way that anyone who talks about negative effects of immigration is routinely attacked (often by hordes of lefty people on Twitter) as ‘racist’. These voices have a huge and in my view poisonous impact on the debate, forcing anyone who wants to make some nuanced points about immigration and identity into defending themselves against charges of racism, which is well established as one of the the worst offences one...
Read more