Though Cowards Flinch

It never fails to surprise me how much attention people like Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, get every time they indulge in utterly predictable rants. Compare, for example, the sentiments behind these remarks at the accession of Gordon Brown in 2007 about immigration, 2008′s sentiments about immigration and last night’s little rant.

On one level, they’re very similar. You have the general theme about the effects of immigration on public services, you have a sop to the anti-racist crowd in comments about poverty being disproportionate amongst young Muslim men (as if that’s a fault of immigration!) and then you have the sting in the tail: the attack on non-Christian immigration and the demand that people must integrate by kowtowing to British values.

And by British values he means Christian values. And by “attack on non-Christian immigration” I’m not extrapolating, Carey himself said he would prefer Christian immigrants, and has stressed the “importance of Christian identity” to the UK.

“What I think I’m concerned about is not saying we must put a limit on people who are non-Christian populations. That’s not the point. We welcome everybody and that’s always been the generous spirit of the United Kingdom.”

But, he said, immigrants must “understand” the UK’s culture, including parliamentary democracy “which is built upon Christian heritage”, “our commitment to the English language” and an understanding the country’s history.

The system should not “give preference to any particular group”, he said, but added that points-based immigration could take these cultural aspects into consideration. (BBC News)

So while protecting himself by saying he doesn’t favour purely Christian immigration, it seems a curious form of dog-whistle politics to then say the opposite, through his points-based immigration system that takes into account the ‘cultural aspects’ he mentions – i.e. our ‘Christian heritage’. He has essentially attempted to connect Christianity with what we expect immigrants to understand and be willing to integrate with. Which is hardly fair for the vast majority of the world’s population, who aren’t Christian.

It’s hard not to agree entirely with Simon Barrow of Ekklesia in a previous retort to the former Archbishop:

“Playing a misleading ‘numbers game’ leaves unaddressed the real problems behind changing patterns of migration – war, instability, massive inequality, displacement and climate change. Many people uproot because they are forced, and turning a few rich Western countries into policed states will not change that.”

Indeed I would go further. Lord Carey despite his recent woolly remarks, has previously attempted to foist the blame for any number of occurrences on to immigration, as well as seeming to regard those of British provenance as somehow above the requirements that might be placed on immigrants (in a moral sense, rather than a technical one).

“With a turnover of a million people in one year, no wonder many people sense that the glue that binds our society together is weakening…It takes time for people of different cultures to get accustomed to each others’ ways and, regrettably, not all newcomers are committed to integration. Some are not even sure about the democratic values that are the very foundation of our society.”

Not all Britons are sure about said ‘democratic values’; certainly not the Christians that keep bleating about a secularist conspiracy (this means you, Dr Sentamu). Pass over that. The ‘glue that binds our society together’ is being weakened by any number of things utterly unrelated to immigration. The passage of once-democratic powers to Quangos or the private sphere are a good example; local health decisions to PCTs and school powers from LEAs to Academy boards.

There’s also the assumption that Christian immigrants will be somehow better at integrating into British culture, or that those who are good at integrating are more likely to be Christian. Is not such an assumption pure bigotry, to assume that one religion – which is far from monolithic – is less prone to violence, extremism and so on than another, irrespective of the complications of comparing different social and economic circumstances? I would say any attempt to connect religion with immigration is utterly bigoted.

More worrying still, and what someone with the intelligent and political nous of George Carey should have been better prepared for, is the wave of pretty naked racism that is following his remarks, no doubt amongst groups like EDL and the BNP, who are already trying to stake a claim to the ‘Christian heritage’ Carey drones on about. Yet this is also happening in the mainstream media no less. Take Telegraph blogs editor Damian Thompson for example:

“Good old George Carey! I never thought I’d write those words, since he talked so much nonsense when he was in office, but in recent years his contacts with the evangelical world have opened his eyes to the shared anti-Christian agenda of multiculturalists and Muslims.”

Multiculturalists and Muslims, mark you, are necessarily anti-Christian. That’s news to me. Could it be, rather, that young Damian just doesn’t like uppity agnostics and other religions objecting to the privileged position of the Anglican church? Or to the state-led imposition of religious values? Might he find it easier to dismiss all such as “multiculturalists and Muslims”? Never mind that this plays right into the hands of the BNP narrative on the same subject.

That is the danger with what Carey is saying, and no doubt MigrationWatch and the other think-tanks will be cashing in on this news cycle as a result of Carey’s remarks. For good reason; whereas Rowan Williams is often considered and attempts conciliation in what he says, Carey in his remarks demonstrates a blatant feeling of Christian superiority over the other religions, which have played their part in the history and culture of this country – and this easily lends itself to racism, since in the UK, most Muslims – the new target group post 9/11 – aren’t white.

He needs to be told this is not acceptable.