Increased Jewish migration from Eastern Europe in the 1880’s, coupled with economic recessions, resulted in the first piece of immigration legislation, the 1905 Aliens Act (Cohen P, 1999, pg 111). The first British immigration law was the 1905 Aliens Act, which was designed specifically to prevent the entry of impoverished East European Jews fleeing pogroms. Further Aliens Restrictions Acts followed this in 1914 and 1919. In 1938 Britain introduced visa requirements for nationals of Germany or Austria, greatly reducing the ease with which Jews fleeing Nazism could seek asylum in Britain.
In the 1950s Britain encouraged immigration from the countries it had earlier colonised and plundered. Caribbean and Asian workers were invited to Britain to do low-paid jobs. In the 1950s the question of, what should be done to tackle racial discrimination? Emerged as a major topic in debates on immigration and race relations. Even in the early stages of black immigration there was awareness that in the longer term racial discrimination was likely to become a volatile political issue. In the first years of post-war black migration political debates on race cantered on the question of immigration control. This meant that that there was great concern under the question of the future of race relations the fear that the arrival of too many black immigrants would lead to problems in respect of housing, employment and social services.
The first measures to deal with potential racial conflict and tackle racial discrimination were taken in the 1960s and took two basic forms. The first involved the setting up of welfare agencies to deal with the problems faced by black immigrants and help the white communities to understand the immigrants. The second involvement was the passage of the 1965 and 1968 Race Relations Acts. In 1965 the labour government passed the first race relation act, which ‘enshrined’ the principle of ending discrimination against black immigrants and their descendents on the grounds of race. Although fairly limited in scope the act was important in confirming the governments concern about racial discrimination and its broad objective of using legislative action to achieve good race relations. The responsibility for enforcing the 1965 and 1968 race relation’s acts was given to regularity agencies and the judical system. The 1965 act set up the community relations and strengthened the powers of the race relation’s board in dealing with complaints of discrimination.
In the 1950s and 1960s life was hard for the migrants who were subjected to racial taunts and abuse on a regular basis at work and in the street. The colour bar had been erected throughout public life. So in housing, the notorious 'No Irish, no dogs, no blacks' sign defined the limits of British citizenship for black people as they were crammed into the decaying inner city areas that had been deserted by those working class people who could afford to get out. In late August and early September of 1958, Britain experienced some of the worst racial violence the country had ever known. For at least a week, the Notting Dale and Notting Hill sections of London were the scene of nightly clashes between whites and West Indian blacks that had settled in the area.
Both Labour and Tory politicians issued statements blaming black people for the 'riots' and were quick to make the link between this and immigration control. In sentencing and dealing with the 100 or so people arrested during the fighting, judges trivialised the events, deploring the hooligan elements whilst rarely condemning their racist motives. The call for immigration control of those who would not conform to the 'British way of life' was freely made in the media and went unchallenged in the absence of any statement from the Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan.
Government responses to 1958 put the issue of immigration control of black British citizens firmly on the public political agenda and the demand for control began to widen. The government now felt that the time had come to introduce the bill it had drafted in 1954. It became the 1962 Commonwealth Immigration Act. This legislation was initially concerned to restrict migration from the Commonwealth rather than refugees; the Commonwealth Immigrations Act 1962 was the first major restriction (Cohen P, 1999, pg 111).
A further Commonwealth Immigrants Act in 1968 and the Immigration Act of 1971 followed the 1962 Act. Since then control after control has been introduced. By the 1980s the government had largely dealt with the immigration of black 'Commonwealth citizens' by a series of measures, including changing the status of their citizenship to a more inferior one, which removed the right to settle here. It then turned its attention once again to refugees, introducing visa controls for those fleeing Sri Lanka in 1985 and Ghana, Nigeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh and India in 1986, in moves reminiscent of the earlier legislation to keep out persecuted Jews.
The 1990s saw a series of laws introduced, tightening restrictions on would-be asylum-seekers further and further. Legislation in Britain echoed provision across Western Europe as 'Fortress Europe' was constructed and prepared to repel outsiders. The EU wants to maintain a pool of cheap labour outside its borders, which it can use in the same way that the US exploits Mexico and Central America. It does not want people from Eastern Europe, the Middle East or elsewhere coming into Western Europe in a way it cannot control at will.
When you begin to examine the social and economic indicators between advanced and less developed countries, you can appreciate the impact such a migration can have upon the migrant. By moving to the first world these individuals (who are usually the best and brightest from their country of origin) can gain higher levels of education, longer life expectancy, better medical care, access to contraception, lower infant mortality rates, higher incomes, diverse consumption, and many other benefits related to living in an industrialized society. (Brain-drain)
Britain's treatment of migrants and refugees is among the worst. Most new waves of immigrants into Britain, from Jewish people to Huguenots and Irish, have at first been treated with hostility and prejudice. Eventually, they become more or less accepted and integrated. Black people, as is well known, are still subjected to a shocking degree of persecution and harassment. Perhaps this is partly because they are distinguishable by their colour. But prejudice against them is deeply rooted in the experiences of colonialism, the slave trade, and the myths that the colonialists invented to justify the exploitation and suffering they imposed on black people.
The British used to pride themselves on providing a haven for refugees, and in fact there is no record of refugees being refused entry to Britain in the nineteenth century. Refugees are often traumatized by their experiences in prisons and by torture in their own countries, are locked up not for anything they themselves have done, but to deter potential refugees. Asylum seekers are also sometimes detained later, when they go to sign at police stations, or when they are about to be deported. About 800-1000 asylum seekers are detained at any one time in the UK. They are detained without time limit, without assured access to lawyers or visitors, and with little information about what is happening to them. The average period of detention is just over two months, but some are locked up for a few days and a few over two years. About half are in ordinary prisons, locked in cells sometimes for prolonged periods with criminals. The others are in so-called detention centres most of them run by private security firms.
In an imperialist nation there cannot be any 'non-racist' immigration controls. Nor can anyone who comes to Britain or any other wealthy nation from a country ravaged by imperialist plunder be dismissed as an, 'economic migrant', rather than a 'real refugee'. Imperialist oppression is both political and economic in character and fleeing it always has a political dimension. While denouncing 'economic migrants' when they are poor, the government is seeking to smooth the path for middle class skilled workers who have medical, teaching, IT, scientific or other skills and wish to work in Britain. This will save the British state the costs of education and training. For such favoured workers bureaucracy will be reduced and the power to issue visas is even being experimentally handed over to multinational companies, who will be able to 'self-certify' employees they wish to bring to Britain from their operations abroad. Immigration controls are not only racist – they are clearly class-based as well.
The widespread harassment, misery and abuse of human rights that have been brought about by, and perpetuated in the name of, Britain's extensive system of racist immigration controls have been major factors in the lives of black people (and other minority groups) in Britain. Yet the role of the state and the critical importance of immigration and nationality laws in the reproduction of racism are often underestimated. Partly this is because immigration controls operate covertly--only those on the receiving end of them experience them directly.
My own approach to these issues is having some sympathy with both positions. Clearly there are no such things as races. Yet it is equally clear that large-scale numbers of people behave as though there is such a thing.
References
- Cohen P, 1999, new ethnicities, old racisms, Zed books.
Bibliography
- Hiro D, 1991, Black British White British, Graften Books.
- Bleich E, 2003, Race Politics in Britain and France, Cambridge University Press
Word count, 1932.
