So London does it again; springs surprises and beats trends. A second generation Pakistani immigrant goes and wins for Labor the Mayorship of London. Over the last few months I often commented on the un-integrated elements of the second generation immigrants in West Europe, and UK is West Europe too I presume. I always alluded to the dangers of the second generation immigrants being educated and growing up alongside the original citizens and suffering discrimination which has left them disenchanted.
Is the election of Sadiq Khan as Lord Mayor of London something which really beats the trend of disenchantment with immigrants or are both UK and London really different? It needs examination in the light of the prevailing environment all over the West, the deepening Islamophobia, the throwback from the effects of the threats posed to Western culture from the migration still underway from Syria and North Africa, the hugely polarizing effects of Trumpism spreading through America and the continuing shenanigans of radical elements everywhere. That is a mouthful in favor of the belief that the Western world has closed ranks to protect its value system and wall off the negative effects of radicalism which has adversely affected its security. In the light of this is Sadiq Khan’s election a flash in the pan or does it allude to the prevalence of inherent tolerance in Western society that accepts individuals for their worth.
A ray of hope for people with a balanced outlook who abhor xenophobia, Sadiq Khan’s triumph is a reiteration of liberalism in UK.
The latest census of London showed that 12.4 per cent of Londoners are Muslim, 48.4 per cent Christian, 1.8 per cent Jewish, 5 per cent Hindu, 1 per cent Sikh and 20.7 per cent profess no faith (their ethnicity is not known). So obviously Sadiq Khan was supported by a large cross section of all faiths for the 57 per cent vote he secured from those who turned out for the election.
I closely observed London during a yearlong stay 10 years ago. I found the city an extremely happy one even less than a year after the 7 July 2005 bombings. There was no xenophobia anywhere. In the academic intellectual circles that I moved in I found no visible discrimination although I do believe that it exists under wraps. What was most marked was the severe criticism against government for supposed inefficiency; for someone living away from the chaos of New Delhi it was a surprise because everything seemed like clockwork. There were rabble rousers among immigrants who bad mouthed the government and -demanded imposition of Shariah. I always wondered why they were not simply deported for having the gall to come to a developed nation and then demand imposition of one’s own culture instead of absorbing that of their new country. Yet, the UK media did not find that too strange and hardly condemned such rants. I expected a condescending attitude from the white Caucasian part of the population but somehow never found that. The UK’s policing system is minimally intrusive and yet very effective. A few years ago immigrants were involved in riots in areas south and east of London; then too the response was surprisingly benign.
I have not lived in other parts of West Europe, only visited cities. However, followed media during short visits and following up on the net one cannot say for sure that liberal values of a similar kind exist there. On the face of it they do. All these nations have opened their doors to immigration for the purpose of absorbing both talent and labor. However, given the situation in Paris or Brussels I wouldn’t expect the electorates there to elect an immigrant to lead their cities.
Given the proclivity of the US to keep electing leaders on proven capability and not ethnicity shouldn’t its mirror image in UK be expected to do the same? Actually not, the US is a nation of immigrants, the UK is not. Reports from the US now indicate a new fascination for Islamophobia. As Donald Trump’s popularity within the Republicans increases, so do the number of instances where common citizen fliers on domestic airlines feel more restive with apparently strange languages, skin color and other indicators of immigrant or foreign descent. Trumpism is affecting America for sure and the same trends are noticeable in Europe which has been deeply affected by the impact of terrorism and immigration. The translation of liberal values into practice, under the prevailing circumstances, would mean the ability of society not to club ethnic groups under labels; maintain balance in its utterances and for media to advise greater tolerance. That is easier said than done in societies used to relative peace and high quality of life. Europe hasn’t been able to do it that well but the UK appears different. No doubt it hasn’t been affected by the travails of new mass migration nor from effects of radical terror. Perhaps the result would have been different had UK recently suffered the same. Or perhaps still not, given the fact that UK feels it is different to the rest of Europe; the Brexit vote on 23 Jun will decide that for sure.
Given the entire analyses one cannot take it away from the man and perhaps that made the difference. Sadiq Khan expressed his abhorrence for Islamism as much as he did for anti-Semitism. It is his persona that probably made even greater difference. A diffident but confident man appreciated for his ability. Yet, without the basic character of the electorate and its tolerance he would still not have made it.
London’s election should wake us up to the feasibility that elections are not always what they seem. People are still inherently appreciative of character and capability, tolerance and balance because that brings a greater assurance to their lives. Donald Trump may rave and rant but if he continues to generalize as he does he is unlikely to triumph in an exercise which still appears to be old world.
Unfortunately Sadiq Khan’s success has been celebrated the wrong way by the Pakistani immigrants with shades of anti-Semitism. He has quickly made amends by ensuring he was also seen at a temple and honored by the local British Indian community. He appears far too cultured and mature to be taken in by some of the typical narrow minded elements of the electorate; possibly his friends from the Tooting days. It augurs well for liberalism and its continued strength in the oldest democracy of the world. It offers succor to those who think Europe may change for the worse; a hope that influence of UK’s continued tolerance and liberalism may still act as a beacon to a society under intense pressure from radicalism and it effects.
