|
2024-08-06 Britain
|
|
The Legacy of Five Governments: Why Britain Drowned in Pogroms
|
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Leonid Tsukanov
[REGNUM] The Labour government faces its first major challenge since being elected as the country has been engulfed in unrest for almost a week following the high-profile murder of three children in Southport.
British citizen Axel Rudakubana, whose parents moved to the country from Rwanda, has stirred up society with his attack and once again brought to the forefront issues that the gentlemen of Downing Street preferred not to mention.
ROOTS OF DISCONTENT
This is not the first time that Foggy Albion has faced such unrest. In modern British history, there have been at least ten major episodes when interethnic and interfaith disputes first spilled over into street confrontations and then into pogroms.
True, almost all of them occurred during the era of Conservative prime ministers – with the possible exception of incidents in Manchester (2001) and Birmingham (2005), which had to be resolved by the Labour Party's Tony Blair. However, these conflict situations were then viewed as a "legacy" of the social policy miscalculations of the Conservative John Major.
Now the government led by Keir Starmer has received its own “inheritance” – and for five predecessors at once. The unrest in Southport, fuelled by anti-immigrant and Islamophobic rumours, quickly spread to other major cities, including London.
The far-right English Defence League has been rightly blamed for organising these disturbances – its members (the vast majority of whom are young) have been the driving force behind any protests even indirectly related to migration since 2009. In addition, it was members of the League who helped to fuel the unrest in Southport by spreading a rumour that the attack was carried out by an illegal migrant.
British tabloids routinely hint at the presence of a “Russian connection.” However, this time they did not ignore the Conservatives, who allegedly receive direct benefits from the failures of the Labor government and themselves push anti-migrant forces to continue the unrest.
Meanwhile, the roots of discontent should be sought somewhat deeper.
Following the migrant crisis triggered by the conflict in Syria in the mid-2010s, Britain faced an influx of refugees from the Middle East. Their arrival was seized upon by radical propagandists, including Pakistani-born British lawyer Anjem Choudary.
The latter not only welcomed the appearance of “Sharia patrols” in London, but also supported the activities of jihadists in Syria and Iraq in every possible way, “blessed” supporters of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to commit crimes, and helped terrorist recruiters illegally enter the country.
The fact that Choudary was only given a life sentence in 2021 (he had previously been jailed for just five years, despite having been a radical for at least 20 years) continues to be used to illustrate the shortcomings of British policy on sensitive issues such as illegal immigration and terrorism. The situation has changed little over the years.
Another serious blow to Britain’s resilience to the threat of mass migration was its exit from the European Union (the so-called Brexit). After the 2016 referendum, London gradually began to withdraw from pan-European control mechanisms, and migration rates inevitably soared.
In the first quarter of 2024 alone, almost 5,000 people entered the country illegally, adding to the more than 56,000 who had already arrived in the past year. London has also, at various times, accepted refugees not only from the Middle East but also from Asia and Africa, increasing tensions between communities and the native population.
As expected, the interests of the working class (the main electorate of the Labor Party) suffered from the influx of guests from abroad, since migrants took over some positions in the labor market, displacing the native population. Each year, the percentage of those displaced steadily increased, and the government preferred to remain silent once again, which only exacerbated the problem.
At the same time, the conservatives' attempts to maneuver between dissatisfied groups - for example, by promoting the idea of deporting captured illegal immigrants to third countries - ended in nothing. The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which none of the previous prime ministers dared to withdraw from, prevented this.
HOW WILL DOWNING STREET RESPOND?
Since the first days of the riots, Labour has sought to demonstrate the toughness of its position. In his address to the nation, Prime Minister Starmer promised that the rioters would “regret taking part in mass riots,” and he even dubbed what is happening in British cities “far-right thuggery.”
At the instigation of the Prime Minister, the Ministry of Internal Affairs promptly increased security in Muslim neighborhoods and religious sites to prevent armed attacks. Additional steps were taken by other departments as well.
At the same time, the work of the Labour Party is currently aimed exclusively at quelling popular unrest: the Starmer government does not have a clear plan on how to solve the problem of illegal migration and relieve social tension. Moreover, they do not plan to withdraw from the ECHR, as the Conservatives previously proposed.
Moreover, given the fact that the attack was carried out by a British citizen (albeit an ethnic Rwandan), the crackdown on migrants and ethnic communities looks dubious and is likely to be seen as an attempt to appease xenophobic groups.
On the other hand, blaming the English Defence League exclusively (while ignoring other hidden actors) also seems like a losing proposition. It guarantees a repeat of the crisis in the future – on an even larger scale.
The Labour Party has not yet developed a “middle” approach, and the time to “name the culprit” has already been lost.
Also, against the backdrop of the miscalculations of Starmer and his team, right-wing populists have become more active, in particular the Reform Party, which had previously built its election campaign on criticism of the Conservatives’ “migration laissez-faire.” Now the “reformers” have switched to Labour, which, in their opinion, is repeating the same mistakes as their predecessors.
Of course, the current protests are unlikely to cost Starmer his premiership – or his party its governing status – but, as with the Conservatives, they cast some doubt on the feasibility of the promises made during the election campaign.
And this could play a cruel joke on the Labour Party in the next electoral cycle.
|
Posted by badanov 2024-08-06 00:00||
||
Front Page|| [11129 views ]
Top
File under: Moslem Colonists
|
|
14:59 Pancho Poodle8452
14:52 Rambler
14:51 Grom the Affective
14:41 Elmerert Hupens2660
14:31 Regular joe
14:28 trailing wife
14:25 magpie
14:18 Elmerert Hupens2660
14:14 Regular joe
14:10 Super Hose
14:08 Super Hose
14:08 Regular joe
14:02 Super Hose
14:01 trailing wife
14:01 trailing wife
13:58 trailing wife
13:56 Super Hose
13:54 trailing wife
13:51 Super Hose
13:44 Elmerert Hupens2660
13:22 Difar Dave
13:20 alanc
13:19 swksvolFF
13:17 Difar Dave
|
