British riots: immigration, refugees, asylum seekers and racism

Written By Dr Jed Boardman

The riots that recently hit the streets of towns and cities in Britain were focused on Muslims, refugees and asylum seekers and were motivated by racism. For those who remember the National Front and British National Party actions of the 1970s, the rioters displayed the same anti-migrant sentiments and hostility towards those who are not seen as fitting into a mythical vision of Britishness.

Whilst the riots may appear to have come out of the blue, they did not happen in a vacuum, but rather within the context of many years of inflammatory government rhetoric on immigration, and the rising influence of social media that allowed the far right to mobilise without the need for a central organisation, fanned by key influencers and a politician recently elected to the UK Parliament.

Britain is a very different nation than the one that existed in the mid-twentieth century, and by many accounts more accepting of diversity and multiculturalism than ever before. But we cannot be complacent about the ever-present threats of racism – are we any closer today to being a non-racist UK than we were in the 1970s?

‘The proliferation of untruths’

Perhaps the spontaneous responses of the anti-racist demonstrators to the destructive rioters should give us some hope. Nevertheless, figures from Hope Not Hate, an organisation that works to expose far-right extremism, suggest that attitudes towards Muslims and multiculturalism in the UK have deteriorated since the events in Southport. Their figures reveal that 28% of people now think that Islam is compatible with a ‘British way of life’ (down from 33%) and 58% think that ‘racial and ethnic divides are the biggest causes of division between groups in the UK’ (up from 53%). It is these public attitudes and the focus on immigration by politicians and the media, as well as the proliferation of untruths, that the far-right capitalise on.

These events raise a host of questions related not only to the antics of the far right and the actions of a significant proportion of mainstream politics but also to the ways in which the government, media, society and communities can respond to racism, immigration, refugees and asylum seekers in the future.

The targeting of the violence on hotels and hostels for asylum seekers was worrying given the vulnerability of many of these people. The prevalence of mental ill-health is high in these groups, and they are likely to have experienced distressing life events and trauma during their journey to the UK, including detention and sometimes torture in their country of origin or during their journey, as well as traumatic bereavements and separations.

Need for reforms

We are especially aware of this in those living in asylum centres and immigration removal centres and many reports have revealed the poor state of these centres, the lack of welfare and the mental health crises experienced by those detained. Only recently the HM Inspectorate of Prisons published a damning report on conditions at Harmondsworth, saying they were the ‘worst inspectors have seen’. In August, Channel 4 News revealed that at the Wethersfield asylum centre in Essex, poor mental health among residents is being ignored, leading to regular suicide attempts and self-harm.

Clearly, the quality of these centres must be reviewed. In addition, the Refugee Council have pointed out the need to reform the asylum legal framework and improve the decision-making process; to take steps to speed up the growing backlog of asylum appeals; and to expand safe routes for refugees to reach the UK. Physical and mental health provisions for asylum seekers in centres and those that are dispersed over the UK after detention or quasi-detention must be improved, as should the support for clinicians working outside the immigration system who encounter asylum seekers in their clinical practice.

The Government has responded promptly to address the riots through action by the criminal justice system. But what next for the medium and long term? We certainly need to look closely at social media and note the advice of Dame Sara Khan that was ignored at the time she was Rishi Sunak’s independent advisor for social cohesion and resilience, to change ineffective legislation that allows racist narratives to be freely propagated, particularly on social media. But further to this, as Dame Margaret Hodge has already pointed out, we need government leadership to change the rhetoric of previous governments on immigration and to engage with voters about the reality of immigration and to make a positive case for it. Immigration is not just an administrative concern, but also a human rights one.

Economic improvements alone are not enough

These actions address the matters of immigration and racism directly, but it is worth thinking more broadly in the longer term. In the UK, as in many other countries, we are faced with a rise in populist politics and a loss of trust in politicians. The UK’s new government has prioritised an economic policy based on growth and productivity, which will hopefully put money in people’s pockets and help fund much-needed social policies. The question arises as to whether this will be sufficient to quell the populist politics and the parochial and small-minded attitudes of a ‘Little Britain’ and the need for connectedness, belonging and respect for others that are currently missing.

Deepak Bhargava and others in their paper The Death of “Deliverism” think not. They point out that many liberal and left-leaning governments believe that if you “deliver” economic improvements for people then this will solidify or shift people’s political allegiances – but this article of faith has not helped Joe Biden’s administration which has enacted a series of progressive economic policies, but nevertheless did not improve their poll ratings. These economic improvements have not had an impact on the nation’s well-being or life satisfaction – in particular for white Americans. Indeed, in 2016, ‘unhappiness’ was the strongest predictor of voting for Trump. The authors suggest four progressive policy strategies:

  1. Policy should take identity, emotion and story more seriously.

  2. Offer ideas about issues that policymakers have long neglected – take people's concerns seriously (e.g. immigration, crime, social media, social connection, isolation, community).

  3. Articulate a vision of the good life grounded in ideas about how we should live, who we should care about, and what makes for a meaningful life.

  4. Reinvigorate organising and recruitment of new people into worker and community organisations (eg working class, ethnic groups, immigrants)

These suggestions are focussed on the health of the public in its broadest sense and, delivered alongside redistributive economic policies, offer a way of pulling together the material and social/emotional aspects of progressive policies and politics. They play into the needs of a diverse society and the importance of collectivism, solidarity, community and belonging. They target something fundamental to our humanity. One may say that we know this already - so why aren’t we doing it?

References

Dr Jed Boardman

Dr Jed Boardman is visiting Senior Lecturer in Social Psychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry and Senior Policy Adviser at the Centre for Mental Health. Throughout his career; he has worked mainly in social and community psychiatry and was Consultant Psychiatrist at South London and Maudsley Trust until 2016.

https://www.careif.org/jed-boardman
Previous

World Mental Health Day 2024 - the importance of preventing poor mental health in young people
Next

South Asian Heritage Month 2024