Race, citizenship and identity: Race Conflict and Change Week 4e
•
0 j'aime•382 vues
Following on from Week 2’s examination of the construction of race as an object of knowledge and last week’s look at post-colonial immigration, this week we will look at how national identity is constructed in response to the perceived threat of the racial ‘other. This week the focus will be on two aspects: Firstly, how do race and racism shape the way in which those racialized as other experience and identify themselves. In particular, in what way does racialization lead to the formation of “ethnic minority communities” and what role does the “community” have in perpetuating racial identities and/or overcoming racism? Secondly, in what way does race and the existence of racial ‘others’ in British society lead to the construction of national identity and citizenship in reaction to so-called ‘foreign’ identities? Who can and who cannot be a member of the nation and a full citizen? How do such reactions manifest themselves (a) in popular culture (for example the revival of ‘Englishness’?) and (b) through policy (in particular the call for ‘national values’ and the implementation of policies such as citizenship tests and ceremonies). Throughout we shall be critiquing the very concept of identity. What does it really mean and is it a useful term for coping with the multiple facets that make up who we are, both as individuals and as groups? How have identities always been mediated by race, and how or should this be challenged?
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Dernier
Dernier (20)
En vedette
En vedette (20)
Race, citizenship and identity: Race Conflict and Change Week 4e
- 1. Race, Citizenship & Identity Race: Conflict & Change Week 4
- 2. Overview… • Racist reactions to changing British identity • Working out “ethnic minority” identities. • National identity & the search for authenticity. • The new citizenship regime.
- 3. “Race relations” Equal opportunity accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance.” Roy Jenkins, Home Secretary 1966
- 4. Racist Reactions http://tinyurl.com/epowell
- 5. Racist Reactions Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood (1968) http://tinyurl.com/epowell
- 6. Racist Reactions Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood (1968) http://tinyurl.com/epowell
- 7. Racist Reactions Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood (1968) Te Rise of the National Front http://tinyurl.com/epowell
- 8. Racist Reactions Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood (1968) Te Rise of the National Front http://tinyurl.com/epowell
- 11. What is identity? Who am I?
- 12. What is identity? Who am I? • A problematic concept.
- 13. What is identity? Who am I? • A problematic concept. • Identity = sameness (Balibar).
- 14. What is identity? Who am I? • A problematic concept. • Identity = sameness (Balibar). • Authenticity/Essence (Fanon).
- 15. What is identity? Who am I? • A problematic concept. • Identity = sameness (Balibar). • Authenticity/Essence (Fanon). • Identification - constructed through splitting (Hall).
- 16. A very British cuppa
- 17. A very British cuppa “I am the sugar at the bottom of the English cup of tea. I am the sweet tooth, the sugar plantations that rotted generations of English children’s teeth…” Stuart Hall
- 18. Who are ‘the others’?
- 19. Who are ‘the others’? Unpacking the mental suitcases.
- 20. Who are ‘the others’? Unpacking the mental suitcases. “The margins begin to speak.”
- 21. Who are ‘the others’? Unpacking the mental suitcases. “The margins begin to speak.”
- 22. Who are ‘the others’? Unpacking the mental suitcases. “The margins begin to speak.” Political blackness
- 23. The birth of ethnic minority communities Unifying identity challenged by the power of ethnicity.
- 24. The Cricket test
- 25. The Cricket test “A large proportion of Britain's Asian population fail to pass the cricket test. Which side do they cheer for? It's an interesting test. Are you still harking back to where you came from or where you are?” Norman Tebbit 1990
- 26. The dangers of chapati flour
- 27. The dangers of chapati flour “If the spread of Pakistani cuisine is the single greatest improvement in British public life over the past half century, it is also worth noting that the bombs used for the failed London transport attacks of July 21, 2005, were made from a mix of hydrogen peroxide and chapati flour.’ Christopher Caldwell 2009
- 31. A new citizenship regime
- 32. A new citizenship regime • 2004: Citizenship tests and ceremonies.
- 33. A new citizenship regime • 2004: Citizenship tests and ceremonies. • New discourse of “British values”.
- 35. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship:
- 36. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers
- 37. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family
- 38. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family • Refugees
- 39. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family • Refugees
- 40. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family • Refugees 3 stages:
- 41. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family • Refugees 3 stages: • Temporary residence
- 42. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family • Refugees 3 stages: • Temporary residence • Probationary citizenship
- 43. ‘Earned citizenship’ 3 routes to citizenship: • Highly skilled/skilled workers • Family • Refugees 3 stages: • Temporary residence • Probationary citizenship • Citizenship/permanent residence.
- 44. Believing in a common future? To what extent is it possible, necessary, or desirable to identify with Britishness?
- 45. Identity Use your creativity to draw a map of your identity
- 46. How British Are You? Take the test
Notes de l'éditeur
- \n
- \n
- Following the end of primary immigration in 1962 and effective closing of the door to non-white immigration, as we saw last week, race relations came onto the agenda.\n\nRace Relations legislation against discrimination began in 1965, elaborated upon in 1968 and more fully in 1976.\n\nThe establishment of the Commission for Racial Equality in 1976 had the aim of ensuring better race relations and integration between different groups of people and of tackling racist discrimination in public services and, finally, to raise public awareness of racism.\n\nThe CRE was replaced in 2007 by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission which merged the CRE with the Disability and Equal Opportunities commissions. This was based on the belief in mainstreaming and dealing with various forms of discrimination under one umbrella (rather than treating racism as specific). \n\nWe will look further at these changes next week when we critique the notion of diversity. Suffice is to note for the moment that the EHRC will most probably be axed by the Coalitio government, leaving no public body responsible for what used to be known as ‘race relations’. \n\nThe policy of “cultural laissez-faire” is at the bedrock of British multiculturalism which we will come back to in the next two weeks. \n
- 1. Powell - reacting to race relations legislation.\n\nSHOW FILM\n\nRivers of blood speech:\nPowell quotes one of his constituents who says:\n“I have three children, all of them have been through grammar school and 2 of them married now with family. I shan’t be satisfied until I have seen them settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”\n\nWorking the idea that he is only speaking up for the common man, Powell adds “here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that this country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else.”\n\nHis discourse focuses on the implosion of Britain due to immigration. His populist language spoke to ordinary people led to believe that their livelihoods were being taken away by migrants.\n\n2. National Front very strong in the 1970s-80s.\n
- 1. Powell - reacting to race relations legislation.\n\nSHOW FILM\n\nRivers of blood speech:\nPowell quotes one of his constituents who says:\n“I have three children, all of them have been through grammar school and 2 of them married now with family. I shan’t be satisfied until I have seen them settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”\n\nWorking the idea that he is only speaking up for the common man, Powell adds “here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that this country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else.”\n\nHis discourse focuses on the implosion of Britain due to immigration. His populist language spoke to ordinary people led to believe that their livelihoods were being taken away by migrants.\n\n2. National Front very strong in the 1970s-80s.\n
- 1. Powell - reacting to race relations legislation.\n\nSHOW FILM\n\nRivers of blood speech:\nPowell quotes one of his constituents who says:\n“I have three children, all of them have been through grammar school and 2 of them married now with family. I shan’t be satisfied until I have seen them settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”\n\nWorking the idea that he is only speaking up for the common man, Powell adds “here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that this country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else.”\n\nHis discourse focuses on the implosion of Britain due to immigration. His populist language spoke to ordinary people led to believe that their livelihoods were being taken away by migrants.\n\n2. National Front very strong in the 1970s-80s.\n
- 1. Powell - reacting to race relations legislation.\n\nSHOW FILM\n\nRivers of blood speech:\nPowell quotes one of his constituents who says:\n“I have three children, all of them have been through grammar school and 2 of them married now with family. I shan’t be satisfied until I have seen them settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”\n\nWorking the idea that he is only speaking up for the common man, Powell adds “here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that this country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else.”\n\nHis discourse focuses on the implosion of Britain due to immigration. His populist language spoke to ordinary people led to believe that their livelihoods were being taken away by migrants.\n\n2. National Front very strong in the 1970s-80s.\n
- BBC White Season\nPowell’s attitudes receiving officially-approved revision due to what are portrayed as the excesses of multiculturalism and the loss of British identity – generally confused with English and/or white identity.\n\nThe riots of the summer of 2001 (to be further discussed in week 8) are a turning point in discussions of British identity and the future of multiculturalism. \n\nWorries about the allegiances of those of immigrant origin, beginning most forcefully in 1989 with the fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie for his book The Satanic Verses and culminating in the 2001 riots and later the 7/7 bombings, not only lead to concerns about the compatibility of Muslims with life in Britain (as we shall examine next week), but also to questioning of what it means to be British.\n\nBefore going on to look at the outcome of the debates on Britishness and how these relate to citizenship, let’s turn to look at what is meant by the widely-used concept of identity. \n
- It is very common to talk about identity and many people feel it is very important to them, but identity is a problematic concept that people find difficult to define.\n\nThe French philosopher Etienne Balibar points out that identity actual means to be the same as others. He theorises that racism creates a multiplicity of samenesses. So identity is not so much about individuality and how we are unique, but about how we strive to be like others and share in a common sense of belonging – one which ultimately divides and separates between us and others. \n\nFrantz Fanon (who we looked at week 2) has been misinterpreted as being an advocate of the need for authentic identity. For example, Charles Taylor (a Canadian philosopher) in his 1994 book, The Politics of recognition, an important book on the theory if multiculturalism, claims that Fanon advocates for the need for all groups to have an authentic identity which can be recognised by others. Taylor bases this on Fanon’s discussion of negritude. The negritude movement was an important part of anti-colonialism during which black people in the colonised world sought out their own culture and traditions as a way of opposing the domination of colonialism which included the imposition of white, western norms and culture. However, Fanon always remains wary of negritude and says that although it is necessary to reclaim blackness as something positive, it can never be the ultimate aim of liberation. Indeed, as a freedom fighter in Algeria, he claims that anyone should be welcomed as a member of the new Algerian nation as long as they believe in its values. In other words, national identity should not be aligned with ethnicity, religion or race. For this reason, Fanon (and others such as Malcomx X) was a pan-Africanist.\n\n4. Stuart Hall:\nIdentification - “always constructed through splitting. Splitting between that which one is, and that which is the other.”\nBack to Fanon’s realisation of his own blackness - through the gaze of the other.\nThe concept of identity wants to create strict separations between groups of identified (I.e. same) individuals. \nOn a national level, identity is bound up with the idea of belonging. And because identity is often racialised it is hard to conceive of an idea of national belonging that is really inclusive of everyone.\n
- It is very common to talk about identity and many people feel it is very important to them, but identity is a problematic concept that people find difficult to define.\n\nThe French philosopher Etienne Balibar points out that identity actual means to be the same as others. He theorises that racism creates a multiplicity of samenesses. So identity is not so much about individuality and how we are unique, but about how we strive to be like others and share in a common sense of belonging – one which ultimately divides and separates between us and others. \n\nFrantz Fanon (who we looked at week 2) has been misinterpreted as being an advocate of the need for authentic identity. For example, Charles Taylor (a Canadian philosopher) in his 1994 book, The Politics of recognition, an important book on the theory if multiculturalism, claims that Fanon advocates for the need for all groups to have an authentic identity which can be recognised by others. Taylor bases this on Fanon’s discussion of negritude. The negritude movement was an important part of anti-colonialism during which black people in the colonised world sought out their own culture and traditions as a way of opposing the domination of colonialism which included the imposition of white, western norms and culture. However, Fanon always remains wary of negritude and says that although it is necessary to reclaim blackness as something positive, it can never be the ultimate aim of liberation. Indeed, as a freedom fighter in Algeria, he claims that anyone should be welcomed as a member of the new Algerian nation as long as they believe in its values. In other words, national identity should not be aligned with ethnicity, religion or race. For this reason, Fanon (and others such as Malcomx X) was a pan-Africanist.\n\n4. Stuart Hall:\nIdentification - “always constructed through splitting. Splitting between that which one is, and that which is the other.”\nBack to Fanon’s realisation of his own blackness - through the gaze of the other.\nThe concept of identity wants to create strict separations between groups of identified (I.e. same) individuals. \nOn a national level, identity is bound up with the idea of belonging. And because identity is often racialised it is hard to conceive of an idea of national belonging that is really inclusive of everyone.\n
- It is very common to talk about identity and many people feel it is very important to them, but identity is a problematic concept that people find difficult to define.\n\nThe French philosopher Etienne Balibar points out that identity actual means to be the same as others. He theorises that racism creates a multiplicity of samenesses. So identity is not so much about individuality and how we are unique, but about how we strive to be like others and share in a common sense of belonging – one which ultimately divides and separates between us and others. \n\nFrantz Fanon (who we looked at week 2) has been misinterpreted as being an advocate of the need for authentic identity. For example, Charles Taylor (a Canadian philosopher) in his 1994 book, The Politics of recognition, an important book on the theory if multiculturalism, claims that Fanon advocates for the need for all groups to have an authentic identity which can be recognised by others. Taylor bases this on Fanon’s discussion of negritude. The negritude movement was an important part of anti-colonialism during which black people in the colonised world sought out their own culture and traditions as a way of opposing the domination of colonialism which included the imposition of white, western norms and culture. However, Fanon always remains wary of negritude and says that although it is necessary to reclaim blackness as something positive, it can never be the ultimate aim of liberation. Indeed, as a freedom fighter in Algeria, he claims that anyone should be welcomed as a member of the new Algerian nation as long as they believe in its values. In other words, national identity should not be aligned with ethnicity, religion or race. For this reason, Fanon (and others such as Malcomx X) was a pan-Africanist.\n\n4. Stuart Hall:\nIdentification - “always constructed through splitting. Splitting between that which one is, and that which is the other.”\nBack to Fanon’s realisation of his own blackness - through the gaze of the other.\nThe concept of identity wants to create strict separations between groups of identified (I.e. same) individuals. \nOn a national level, identity is bound up with the idea of belonging. And because identity is often racialised it is hard to conceive of an idea of national belonging that is really inclusive of everyone.\n
- It is very common to talk about identity and many people feel it is very important to them, but identity is a problematic concept that people find difficult to define.\n\nThe French philosopher Etienne Balibar points out that identity actual means to be the same as others. He theorises that racism creates a multiplicity of samenesses. So identity is not so much about individuality and how we are unique, but about how we strive to be like others and share in a common sense of belonging – one which ultimately divides and separates between us and others. \n\nFrantz Fanon (who we looked at week 2) has been misinterpreted as being an advocate of the need for authentic identity. For example, Charles Taylor (a Canadian philosopher) in his 1994 book, The Politics of recognition, an important book on the theory if multiculturalism, claims that Fanon advocates for the need for all groups to have an authentic identity which can be recognised by others. Taylor bases this on Fanon’s discussion of negritude. The negritude movement was an important part of anti-colonialism during which black people in the colonised world sought out their own culture and traditions as a way of opposing the domination of colonialism which included the imposition of white, western norms and culture. However, Fanon always remains wary of negritude and says that although it is necessary to reclaim blackness as something positive, it can never be the ultimate aim of liberation. Indeed, as a freedom fighter in Algeria, he claims that anyone should be welcomed as a member of the new Algerian nation as long as they believe in its values. In other words, national identity should not be aligned with ethnicity, religion or race. For this reason, Fanon (and others such as Malcomx X) was a pan-Africanist.\n\n4. Stuart Hall:\nIdentification - “always constructed through splitting. Splitting between that which one is, and that which is the other.”\nBack to Fanon’s realisation of his own blackness - through the gaze of the other.\nThe concept of identity wants to create strict separations between groups of identified (I.e. same) individuals. \nOn a national level, identity is bound up with the idea of belonging. And because identity is often racialised it is hard to conceive of an idea of national belonging that is really inclusive of everyone.\n
- So what of British identity?\n\nContrary to racist rhetoric, there are no pure identities. \nPostcolonial identities are necessarily bound up with each other.\nBritain would not be as it is today without colonialism or without postcolonial immigration.\nThe same is true for those who came to settle in England. Everyone’s identity is necessarily shaped through the coming into contact with the other, so that eventually there is no real and distinct ‘other’ except in our discourse.\n\nWe turn now to look at how the changing landscape of Britain, brought about by immigration, affects both those who immigrated and their descendants, and \n
- Realising that “we were not going back”\nBut when the ‘other’ begins to unpack the mental suitcases, this is also the beginning of a more full-blown racism. Blacks, Asians and others were here to stay…\n\n2. “Collective identity against the practices of a racist society”\nStuart Hall calls this ‘identity politics 1’. People who shared the experience of immigration began to mobilise in reaction to racism. No longer accepting that they were guests in a society willing to put up with them as long as they “kept their heads down”, black and Asian people began to conceive of themselves as having every bit as much right to full citizenship and participation as anyone else.\n\nInspired first by the civil rights movement and later by black power in the US, people began to mobilise for better working conditions, against racist policing and for better chances in education for their children.\n\n3. Political blackness - emerges at the end of the 1960s. \nBlack is not about skin colour but about an identification with a political category.\nIrish as politically black.\n\nPolitical blackness stands against ethnicity or the division into unique ethnic groups. It is an approach that is based on a class analysis of racism by assuming the shared fate of the new black and brown working class.\n\nBut it is criticised for being unable to take into account the specificity of the Asian experience.\nTariq Modood claims the blackness has no room for religious identity.\n
- Realising that “we were not going back”\nBut when the ‘other’ begins to unpack the mental suitcases, this is also the beginning of a more full-blown racism. Blacks, Asians and others were here to stay…\n\n2. “Collective identity against the practices of a racist society”\nStuart Hall calls this ‘identity politics 1’. People who shared the experience of immigration began to mobilise in reaction to racism. No longer accepting that they were guests in a society willing to put up with them as long as they “kept their heads down”, black and Asian people began to conceive of themselves as having every bit as much right to full citizenship and participation as anyone else.\n\nInspired first by the civil rights movement and later by black power in the US, people began to mobilise for better working conditions, against racist policing and for better chances in education for their children.\n\n3. Political blackness - emerges at the end of the 1960s. \nBlack is not about skin colour but about an identification with a political category.\nIrish as politically black.\n\nPolitical blackness stands against ethnicity or the division into unique ethnic groups. It is an approach that is based on a class analysis of racism by assuming the shared fate of the new black and brown working class.\n\nBut it is criticised for being unable to take into account the specificity of the Asian experience.\nTariq Modood claims the blackness has no room for religious identity.\n
- Realising that “we were not going back”\nBut when the ‘other’ begins to unpack the mental suitcases, this is also the beginning of a more full-blown racism. Blacks, Asians and others were here to stay…\n\n2. “Collective identity against the practices of a racist society”\nStuart Hall calls this ‘identity politics 1’. People who shared the experience of immigration began to mobilise in reaction to racism. No longer accepting that they were guests in a society willing to put up with them as long as they “kept their heads down”, black and Asian people began to conceive of themselves as having every bit as much right to full citizenship and participation as anyone else.\n\nInspired first by the civil rights movement and later by black power in the US, people began to mobilise for better working conditions, against racist policing and for better chances in education for their children.\n\n3. Political blackness - emerges at the end of the 1960s. \nBlack is not about skin colour but about an identification with a political category.\nIrish as politically black.\n\nPolitical blackness stands against ethnicity or the division into unique ethnic groups. It is an approach that is based on a class analysis of racism by assuming the shared fate of the new black and brown working class.\n\nBut it is criticised for being unable to take into account the specificity of the Asian experience.\nTariq Modood claims the blackness has no room for religious identity.\n
- Realising that “we were not going back”\nBut when the ‘other’ begins to unpack the mental suitcases, this is also the beginning of a more full-blown racism. Blacks, Asians and others were here to stay…\n\n2. “Collective identity against the practices of a racist society”\nStuart Hall calls this ‘identity politics 1’. People who shared the experience of immigration began to mobilise in reaction to racism. No longer accepting that they were guests in a society willing to put up with them as long as they “kept their heads down”, black and Asian people began to conceive of themselves as having every bit as much right to full citizenship and participation as anyone else.\n\nInspired first by the civil rights movement and later by black power in the US, people began to mobilise for better working conditions, against racist policing and for better chances in education for their children.\n\n3. Political blackness - emerges at the end of the 1960s. \nBlack is not about skin colour but about an identification with a political category.\nIrish as politically black.\n\nPolitical blackness stands against ethnicity or the division into unique ethnic groups. It is an approach that is based on a class analysis of racism by assuming the shared fate of the new black and brown working class.\n\nBut it is criticised for being unable to take into account the specificity of the Asian experience.\nTariq Modood claims the blackness has no room for religious identity.\n
- Realising that “we were not going back”\nBut when the ‘other’ begins to unpack the mental suitcases, this is also the beginning of a more full-blown racism. Blacks, Asians and others were here to stay…\n\n2. “Collective identity against the practices of a racist society”\nStuart Hall calls this ‘identity politics 1’. People who shared the experience of immigration began to mobilise in reaction to racism. No longer accepting that they were guests in a society willing to put up with them as long as they “kept their heads down”, black and Asian people began to conceive of themselves as having every bit as much right to full citizenship and participation as anyone else.\n\nInspired first by the civil rights movement and later by black power in the US, people began to mobilise for better working conditions, against racist policing and for better chances in education for their children.\n\n3. Political blackness - emerges at the end of the 1960s. \nBlack is not about skin colour but about an identification with a political category.\nIrish as politically black.\n\nPolitical blackness stands against ethnicity or the division into unique ethnic groups. It is an approach that is based on a class analysis of racism by assuming the shared fate of the new black and brown working class.\n\nBut it is criticised for being unable to take into account the specificity of the Asian experience.\nTariq Modood claims the blackness has no room for religious identity.\n
- The unifying force of political blackness was never shared across the board.\nTwo factors weakened the solidarity on the basis of the shared experience of immigration:\nThe power of ethnic minority community leaders and religious leaders. Kundnani talks about Britain being organised according to ethnic fiefdoms much in the same way as colonial India.\n\n the beginnings of multiculturalism in the 1980s and the emphasis placed on the uniqueness of culture away from a political interpretation of the response to racism (as we shall see next week).\n\nEthnicity is a powerful concept because it allows both for internal organisation and for external identification.\nDisappointed by the apparent inability of political blackness to unify and effectively stand up to racism, the appeal of ethnicity is in its uniqueness. Each group, identified according to religious affiliation or home country etc. could carve out an apparently authentic identity distinguishable from the rest.\nThis gives strength to the idea of community as being the overriding factor with which individuals identify.\nThis suits both authoritarian leaders and government for whom easily identifying groups of people according to community affiliation makes it easier to place each group and develop policy often on the grounds of highly stereotyped views of that group’s needs.\n\nSo, the formation of strong ethnic identities – opposed to solidarity movements around political blackness – needs to be seen both as a process internal to communities and external to them. Not only can strong community ties provide comfort, structure organisation and represent members politically, it can also be used by the state as a means to weaken potential solidarity between groups by treating them as separate rather than as politically united.\n
- Despite this the significance placed on ethnicity and identity leads leading figures to question the allegiance of British citizens from immigrant backgrounds.\n\nTory MP Norman Tebbit’s ‘cricket test’ is an example of the suspicion surrounding that allegiance.\n
- \nToday, in the light of 7/7 and the perceived failure of multiculturalism, journalists such as ‘Christopher Caldwell on his book, Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Can Europe be the Same with different people in it?’ make an association between the impact of immigrant cultures on British society and a rejection of British values.\n
- The White Season should be seen as part of a wider focus on white identities, specifically the white working class – a by-now largely mythical category due to the demise of industry in the UK but nonetheless very important in narratives about what it means to be white and British.\n\nImportant publications such as Dench, Gavron and Young’s The New East End, criticised by Robert Moore for backing up the claims of the BNP that white people have been overlooked due to greater concern with the needs of ‘minorities’ have framed the new agenda away from concerns with fighting racism and discrimination. The notion that white people have been overlooked due to an over-emphasis on racism is at the heart of a new focus on national identity and Britishness.\n\nThe emergence of new groups on the far right such as the English Defence league and the rise in votes for the British National Party in the general elections of 2010 and the European elections of 2009 are seen as evidence of the fact that white Britons are alienated from society, believing that their rights are deemed less important than those of minorities and immigrants, an argument fuelled by the tabloid press.\n\nOne of the things that seems to cause most concern is the supposed rise in ethnically segregated areas and a decline in numbers of white people in certain parts of Britain’s towns and cities. Both the Commission for Racial Equality (before its transformation into the EHRC), the BNP and the government are concerned about this, a concern which is mirrored in the heightened success of groups such as the EDL.\n\nFor example, a 2007 CRE report argued that “It is hard to imagine how, even with all the best will in the world, white black and brown families can hope to \nshare their hopes, dreams and ambitions.”\nHowever, Finney and Simpson in their 2009 book, ‘Sleepwalking to Segregation: Challenging myths about race and migration”, argue that selective language is used in making these kinds of arguments.\nFor example, they say, “a minority population under 5% is supposed to make an area ‘largely white’, while the presence of a relatively large white population of over 15% makes an area ‘almost totally non-white’ . As so often, the lack of a white popuation is seen as ‘extreme’ in a way that the lack of minority ethnic groups is not.’\n\nAll of this calls into question the type of society that Britain should be. Does the very fact of decreasing whiteness (if it were in fact true) change something essential to Britishness. If people identify as British, whatever their skin colour, is that not sufficient?\nCRE 2007\n
- The White Season should be seen as part of a wider focus on white identities, specifically the white working class – a by-now largely mythical category due to the demise of industry in the UK but nonetheless very important in narratives about what it means to be white and British.\n\nImportant publications such as Dench, Gavron and Young’s The New East End, criticised by Robert Moore for backing up the claims of the BNP that white people have been overlooked due to greater concern with the needs of ‘minorities’ have framed the new agenda away from concerns with fighting racism and discrimination. The notion that white people have been overlooked due to an over-emphasis on racism is at the heart of a new focus on national identity and Britishness.\n\nThe emergence of new groups on the far right such as the English Defence league and the rise in votes for the British National Party in the general elections of 2010 and the European elections of 2009 are seen as evidence of the fact that white Britons are alienated from society, believing that their rights are deemed less important than those of minorities and immigrants, an argument fuelled by the tabloid press.\n\nOne of the things that seems to cause most concern is the supposed rise in ethnically segregated areas and a decline in numbers of white people in certain parts of Britain’s towns and cities. Both the Commission for Racial Equality (before its transformation into the EHRC), the BNP and the government are concerned about this, a concern which is mirrored in the heightened success of groups such as the EDL.\n\nFor example, a 2007 CRE report argued that “It is hard to imagine how, even with all the best will in the world, white black and brown families can hope to \nshare their hopes, dreams and ambitions.”\nHowever, Finney and Simpson in their 2009 book, ‘Sleepwalking to Segregation: Challenging myths about race and migration”, argue that selective language is used in making these kinds of arguments.\nFor example, they say, “a minority population under 5% is supposed to make an area ‘largely white’, while the presence of a relatively large white population of over 15% makes an area ‘almost totally non-white’ . As so often, the lack of a white popuation is seen as ‘extreme’ in a way that the lack of minority ethnic groups is not.’\n\nAll of this calls into question the type of society that Britain should be. Does the very fact of decreasing whiteness (if it were in fact true) change something essential to Britishness. If people identify as British, whatever their skin colour, is that not sufficient?\nCRE 2007\n
- The White Season should be seen as part of a wider focus on white identities, specifically the white working class – a by-now largely mythical category due to the demise of industry in the UK but nonetheless very important in narratives about what it means to be white and British.\n\nImportant publications such as Dench, Gavron and Young’s The New East End, criticised by Robert Moore for backing up the claims of the BNP that white people have been overlooked due to greater concern with the needs of ‘minorities’ have framed the new agenda away from concerns with fighting racism and discrimination. The notion that white people have been overlooked due to an over-emphasis on racism is at the heart of a new focus on national identity and Britishness.\n\nThe emergence of new groups on the far right such as the English Defence league and the rise in votes for the British National Party in the general elections of 2010 and the European elections of 2009 are seen as evidence of the fact that white Britons are alienated from society, believing that their rights are deemed less important than those of minorities and immigrants, an argument fuelled by the tabloid press.\n\nOne of the things that seems to cause most concern is the supposed rise in ethnically segregated areas and a decline in numbers of white people in certain parts of Britain’s towns and cities. Both the Commission for Racial Equality (before its transformation into the EHRC), the BNP and the government are concerned about this, a concern which is mirrored in the heightened success of groups such as the EDL.\n\nFor example, a 2007 CRE report argued that “It is hard to imagine how, even with all the best will in the world, white black and brown families can hope to \nshare their hopes, dreams and ambitions.”\nHowever, Finney and Simpson in their 2009 book, ‘Sleepwalking to Segregation: Challenging myths about race and migration”, argue that selective language is used in making these kinds of arguments.\nFor example, they say, “a minority population under 5% is supposed to make an area ‘largely white’, while the presence of a relatively large white population of over 15% makes an area ‘almost totally non-white’ . As so often, the lack of a white popuation is seen as ‘extreme’ in a way that the lack of minority ethnic groups is not.’\n\nAll of this calls into question the type of society that Britain should be. Does the very fact of decreasing whiteness (if it were in fact true) change something essential to Britishness. If people identify as British, whatever their skin colour, is that not sufficient?\nCRE 2007\n
- The White Season should be seen as part of a wider focus on white identities, specifically the white working class – a by-now largely mythical category due to the demise of industry in the UK but nonetheless very important in narratives about what it means to be white and British.\n\nImportant publications such as Dench, Gavron and Young’s The New East End, criticised by Robert Moore for backing up the claims of the BNP that white people have been overlooked due to greater concern with the needs of ‘minorities’ have framed the new agenda away from concerns with fighting racism and discrimination. The notion that white people have been overlooked due to an over-emphasis on racism is at the heart of a new focus on national identity and Britishness.\n\nThe emergence of new groups on the far right such as the English Defence league and the rise in votes for the British National Party in the general elections of 2010 and the European elections of 2009 are seen as evidence of the fact that white Britons are alienated from society, believing that their rights are deemed less important than those of minorities and immigrants, an argument fuelled by the tabloid press.\n\nOne of the things that seems to cause most concern is the supposed rise in ethnically segregated areas and a decline in numbers of white people in certain parts of Britain’s towns and cities. Both the Commission for Racial Equality (before its transformation into the EHRC), the BNP and the government are concerned about this, a concern which is mirrored in the heightened success of groups such as the EDL.\n\nFor example, a 2007 CRE report argued that “It is hard to imagine how, even with all the best will in the world, white black and brown families can hope to \nshare their hopes, dreams and ambitions.”\nHowever, Finney and Simpson in their 2009 book, ‘Sleepwalking to Segregation: Challenging myths about race and migration”, argue that selective language is used in making these kinds of arguments.\nFor example, they say, “a minority population under 5% is supposed to make an area ‘largely white’, while the presence of a relatively large white population of over 15% makes an area ‘almost totally non-white’ . As so often, the lack of a white popuation is seen as ‘extreme’ in a way that the lack of minority ethnic groups is not.’\n\nAll of this calls into question the type of society that Britain should be. Does the very fact of decreasing whiteness (if it were in fact true) change something essential to Britishness. If people identify as British, whatever their skin colour, is that not sufficient?\nCRE 2007\n
- The sense that Britishness is under threat from immigration and rising numbers of mixed identities and a decline in some areas of white populations is being countered by the introduction of a new citizenship regime. This shows how identity, nationality and migration are linked to citizenship, continuing the trend that has defined British immigration policy since its inception (as discussed last week). \n\nCitizenship tests and ceremonies were introduced in 2004.\n\n“Life in the UK test” - Everyone who is applying for British citizenship or indefinite leave to remain must take the Life in the UK test. If an applicant’s level of English is below level 3 of ESOL they must also take English language and citizenship classes run by further education or community colleges.\n\nApplicants have to pay to take the test.\n\nThere are 24 questions based on a book called ‘Life in the UK: A journey to citizenship’.\n\nCeremonies: replace oaths taken in private. At the 1st ever citizenship ceremony in February 2004, the then Home Secretary David Blunkett said that the ceremonies were a key part of citizenship reforms. He said,\n\n“The integration of all those who live in the UK is a central part of our managed migration which benefits our society and economy.”\n\nThis demonstrates the degree to which migration and citizenship policy are still intertwined in British policy-making.\n\n2. The introduction of citizenship tests and ceremonies should be seen in light of the general preoccupation with Britishness which replaces multiculturalism, which as we shall see, is today deemed to be in crisis. Citizenship rituals are thought by the government to promote integration and, as Blunkett stated, “a deeper understanding of British values.”\n
- The sense that Britishness is under threat from immigration and rising numbers of mixed identities and a decline in some areas of white populations is being countered by the introduction of a new citizenship regime. This shows how identity, nationality and migration are linked to citizenship, continuing the trend that has defined British immigration policy since its inception (as discussed last week). \n\nCitizenship tests and ceremonies were introduced in 2004.\n\n“Life in the UK test” - Everyone who is applying for British citizenship or indefinite leave to remain must take the Life in the UK test. If an applicant’s level of English is below level 3 of ESOL they must also take English language and citizenship classes run by further education or community colleges.\n\nApplicants have to pay to take the test.\n\nThere are 24 questions based on a book called ‘Life in the UK: A journey to citizenship’.\n\nCeremonies: replace oaths taken in private. At the 1st ever citizenship ceremony in February 2004, the then Home Secretary David Blunkett said that the ceremonies were a key part of citizenship reforms. He said,\n\n“The integration of all those who live in the UK is a central part of our managed migration which benefits our society and economy.”\n\nThis demonstrates the degree to which migration and citizenship policy are still intertwined in British policy-making.\n\n2. The introduction of citizenship tests and ceremonies should be seen in light of the general preoccupation with Britishness which replaces multiculturalism, which as we shall see, is today deemed to be in crisis. Citizenship rituals are thought by the government to promote integration and, as Blunkett stated, “a deeper understanding of British values.”\n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- A 2008 green paper ‘The Path to Citizenship: Next steps to reforming the immigration system” makes a clear link between the new points-based migration scheme (discussed last week) and the acquisition of citizenship.\n\nThe green paper (on SyD) is based in part on consultation with the public and is revealing of the process of developing new policy.\n\nThe main principle underpinning the citizenship reforms it sets out are the need to “put British values at the heart of the system”\n\n3 routes to citizenship:\nOnly those who are deemed necessary for the UK economy will be granted the opportunity to apply for citizenship. This only includes skilled or highly skilled workers. Lower skilled workers will still be allowed to come in if necessary but will have no way of applying for citizenship.\n\nThe green paper states: “Visitors and migrants who enter the UK under Tiers 4 and 5 (see last week) will be classed as temporary residents but will not be eligible to progress to probationary citizenship.”\n\nThose people will then be expected to leave the UK, as will anyone whose citizenship application is rejected.\n\nFamily members of British citizens or residents will also be eligible, but this is not automatic.\n\nAs we saw last week, it is becoming harder and harder to claim asylum and there is no reason to think that this route to citizenship will become easier with the new proposals.\n\n3 stages:\n\nThe stages are to ensure would-be citizens contribution to the UK and its economy.\n\nStage 1: During temporary residence, economic migrants contribute to taxes while their family members are paid for by a sponsor. The potential citizen has to prove his/her self-sufficiency or face being deported. \nSo, temporary residents have different rights to other tax payers, who would be protected by the state should they become ill or unemployed foe example.\n\nStage 2: Probationary citizenship is a new stage being proposed by the government. It is seen as a stepping stone from temporary residence to full citizenship.\nWould-be citizens have to “demonstrate that they have earned their right to British citizenship or permanent residence.”\n\nEarning the right to citizenship includes demonstrating:\nCommand of the English language\nWorking hard and paying taxes\nObeying the law\nDemonstrating active citizenship.\n\nThe last criterion is most interesting because it goes beyond merely obeying the law and paying taxes (something we are all supposed to do).\nThis is where the government is pushing its agenda for promoting British values and integration with the wider community.\nMigrants therefore have to demonstrate a level of ‘community involvement’ although what this is not specified. As the report says, “we do not want to be overly prescriptive about the type of active citizenship that will be required.”\n\nThis new development is interesting from two perspectives:\nit is over and above what people who are born here are required to do - we do not have to do voluntary work in order to be citizens. \nThere will need to be a structure for determining what constitutes active citizenship as this is not defined. For example, would certain types of activity be seen as contravening the aims of promoting Britishness and integration? Who will determine this? Could certain types of activity actually lead to would-be citizens being denied citizenship because they do not fall within what is considered to be positive active citizenship. This could be an issue when seen in light of the wide range of activities that are considered suspicious from an anti-terrorism perspective, for example. \n
- The discussion between Hardeep Singh and Aki Nawaz points to the divide between those who see Britishness as changing and for there being a place for all, and those who see very little change.\nNawaz’s more politicised stance recognises the fact that the emphasis placed on ethnicity, by both the government and community leaders, has led to the erosion of the possibility for solidarity across minority communities. \n
- \n
- \n