Friday, June 12, 2015

Neither Mr Lammy not Ms Hudson-Wilkin have the right to impose more burdens

David Lammy MP and the Reverend Rose Hudson-Wilkin (Speaker's Chaplain in the House of Commons and "high flyer" in the Church of England) appeared on This Week on BBC 1 last night:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006mvhd/episodes/player

Both of these individuals advocated an open-door policy towards migrants rescued from the Mediterranean.

They argued that because people are dying there is an emergency that overrides any other concerns and must be met with open generosity by the United Kingdom.

They are of course on the surface right in saying this.  But at a deeper level they are being profoundly dishonest, manipulative and hypocritical.  That Members of Parliament are dishonest, manipulative and hypocritical is not surprising, but for an Anglican priest to behave in this way is a disgrace.

Dishonest because they pretended the issue is a simple one of access, of a rich United Kingdom shutting the door in the face of desperate people dying before our eyes.  In reality, admitting these people would cause immense pain to the poorest people in our society and would reproduce in many parts of the United Kingdom communities little different from Somalia, Eritrea, northern Nigeria etc.  The burden of this would fall upon the poorest English households and individuals already trying to cope with conditions that are in many cases intolerable - neither Mr Lammy not Ms Hudson-Wilkin have the right to impose more burdens upon the poor.

Manipulative because they used emotional blackmail to argue a case that needs to be addressed rationally.  If people are dying then something needs to be done - sensibly and sustainably, not a knee-jerk reaction.  If however emotional arguments are to be used Mr Lammy and Ms Hudson-Wilkin should set an example by selling everything they have (EVERYTHING please, for the rest of your lives) and giving it to the relief of these migrants - only then will they have the moral authority to lecture the rest of us and use the example of the Good Samaritan (as Ms Hudson-Wilkin did during the programme).

Hypocritical because they advocated for England a policy (open door to cross-Mediterranean migrants) that they do not advocate for their own cultural home of the West Indies.  We know there is plenty of room in the West Indies because millions of West Indians have moved to the United Kingdom.  Both Mr Lammy and Ms Hudson-Wilkin are prominent members of the West Indian diaspora who would be listened to by the West Indian authorities - and yet they are not urging the West Indians to take these migrants.

During the discussion the example of the Huguenot migration in the 18th century was raised.  Migrations that occurred in pre-democratic times cannot be used as a precedent for societies which are supposed to be governed by democratic majority rule.  Majority opinion has always opposed migration and yet it has been forced through by the politicians so that 14% of the population is now non-indigenous - this is an injustice which must eventually be addressed.

There was also the suspicion (in seeing once again big-mouths from immigrant backgrounds advocating yet more immigration) that the left is pursuing a covert policy here.  "The answer to resistance to immigration is to encourage more immigration so that eventually everyone will settle down in a happy multi-cultural melting-pot" this infantile policy can be paraphrased as.  The solution to this insidious covert policy has been provided by Gandhi - complete non-co-operation with the forces that oppress you (be polite to migrants and their communities, obviously keep completely within the law, but otherwise shun them and reject them and courteously ask them to leave on every occasion that you are able to do so).

Note:  the policy being followed by the United Kingdom government is the correct one - be very generous in providing aid and relief to people in disress within the regions where the crisis occurs, so that the majority of people can be helped, not just the ones with the money or the connections or the pushiness to get themselves to an embarkation point for Europe.

No comments: