By August an estimated 5,000 people had attempted to cross the Channel from France in small vessels: many in small inflatable overloaded boats with engines provided by unscrupulous people traffickers, some, acting alone, in much more precarious craft such as an inflated paddling pool propelled by shovels. This is a substantial increase compared to last year.
However, some 660,000 people who are not UK citizens move to the country annually, so 5,000 is 0.76% of total non-citizen migration. So, if such crossings this year have increased by as much as 100%, the total increase in the number of people who arrive by such perilous means is 0.38% of annual inward migration. It is true that there are some special local circumstances that cause particular difficulties. Most of the people rescued from the crossings are landed in Dover. Those who are under 16 years old become the responsibility of Kent County Council, whose child care services struggle to cope. But in general one might argue quite reasonably that a country with our resources should not find it too difficult to deal humanely with an additional 0.38%. This is not to ignore the appalling crimes of the people traffickers, but rather to argue that we can deal humanely with their victims.
However, the plight of those who risk their lives in the Channel will never deter Ms Patel from seizing an opportunity to appear tough. She announced the appointment of a Clandestine Channel Threat Commander, and made herself look doubly robust by choosing a former Marine for the post. Exactly how desperate men, women and children in dangerous craft who risk their lives are a threat to the UK she did not specify. Nor are they terribly clandestine, since their very purpose is to be found and put ashore in the UK. To be just to her Commander, he has stressed that his role is to disrupt the business model of the people smugglers who exploit those desperate enough to risk their lives to reach our country. Whether the Patel plan is the right answer is a big question, but that will not trouble Ms Patel. Her principal focus seems to be to enhance her political reputation.
Ms Patel has received the rhetorical support of her Prime Minister, who cares as little for humanity as she does. He has denounced the “leftie lawyers” who make it difficult to deport the new arrivals. The Home Office, eager to reinforce the Prime Minister’s message, has issued an animated video in which they criticize “activist lawyers”. The Law Society has pointed out that to uphold humanitarian law by preventing the government from deporting people illegally is not activism – the lawyers in question are simply upholding the rule of law.
Ms Patel’s conjuring of threats out of the plight of people who have travelled for years through dangerous territories to reach the Channel is ably supported by some far more disreputable figures. A character called Nigel Farage made a video of himself at a hotel where people rescued from the Channel are being housed temporarily. “Nigel”, as he likes to be known familiarly to his admirers, asked to reserve a room, knowing that none is available. Of course, he had no real intention of staying at the hotel. His purpose was to be refused the God-given right of a British patriot to book the hotel room of his choice even when he has no desire to stay in it. The purpose of his video was to demonstrate that he had been denied his rights by these dark-skinned characters sponging off the British taxpayer.
In Epping another hotel houses unfortunate people rescued from their boats. An Epping councillor made a video in which he reported an increase in crime since the new residents arrived. Essex police has stated publicly that no such increase in crime has occurred. The councillor explains that the people of Epping do not want to become Hackney (for my US friends, Hackney is a London Borough with a very diverse population). Asked if he means that Epping should be all-white, he replied that of course that is what he means. Bad news for the 10% of Epping residents who do not meet his criteria to be rightful residents of the borough.
Ms Patel, the Prime Minister, “Nigel” and the Epping councillor, might learn a thing or two from the history of the little village of Petlacala, in the eastern mountains of Guerrero, Mexico. The village’s name means in Náhuatl “Place of the Mat Houses”, or “Place Where the Tribute is Stored”. Petlacala was founded in the 15th, or possibly the early 16th century, by a group of people who left the valley of Mexico to escape the tribute demands of the Aztec rulers of Tenochtitlan. Their journey of 800km lasted many years, perhaps several decades. At various points they stopped for a while and settled to cultivate land to feed themselves. The people of Petlacala recorded the story of their migration in a document written partly in Náhuatl, partly in glyphs, with a map and pictures. It was kept by the village shaman, brought out for important ceremonies and to defend the lands of the community in the Spanish courts. We do not know when the first version was created. The current document is a 1953 copy of an earlier lienzo (a document created on textiles) that was damaged by floods and a fire.
Offerings of food placed in front of the Lienzo de Petlacala, San Pedro Petlacala
The Códice de Totomixtlahuaca, late 16th century. Totomixtlahuaca is about 100km south of San Pedro Petlacala
There are several similar documents in other villages in eastern Guerrero. All tell similar stories of groups that fled tyrannical rulers, violence or famine. In all cases the journeys lasted a number of years. Along the way they relied on the benevolence, or at least the tolerance, of local peoples to allow them to farm land temporarily so that they could feed themselves. The documents describe the formal etiquette and rhetoric involved when requesting land. The newcomers would offer the local ruler gifts, but would modestly emphasize that their gifts were poor. The local ruler would respond respectfully, humbly belittling his merits. The documents do not record whether some requests for land were refused. It is quite possible that the new arrivals were not always made welcome. Nevertheless, they were able to keep moving in search of a place to make their permanent home, eventually achieving their wish. Thus, they received sufficient helping hands from strangers to reach a place of safety.
Now, we should not imagine that the people of Petlacala and other villages in the region settled into a peaceful existence where all prospered and never exchanged an angry word. Conflict with other villages was the norm in 15th and 16th century Mexico. Petty warfare was simply a fact of everybody’s life, whether newcomer or long-term resident. Nevertheless, many groups of people were able to wander in search of a better place to live, relatively unimpeded, to till fields to sustain themselves, and eventually to negotiate a place to make permanent new homes. Newcomers and existing communities spoke to one another respectfully and obeyed norms of behaviour and hospitality.
San Pedro Petlacala, general view
How differently we behave in the prosperous “global” Britain of which our government likes to boast. Our government demonizes the vulnerable and desperate. The goal is to spread alarm and portray the government as a stout defender against threats. A previous Conservative Prime Minister, David Cameron once referred in the House of Commons to “swarms” of migrants crossing the Mediterranean. I wrote to my MP to decry the dehumanizing of fellow human beings. His initial response was that the term was uttered in the heat of debate. I replied that nothing Mr Cameron said in the Commons was unscripted and unintentional. He then explained that the term was used to expose the “open door immigration policy” of the Labour opposition. In other words, our Prime Minister depicted vulnerable people as mere insects to score a political point.
I was relieved that the Home Office Permanent Secretary withdrew the appalling "Dads Army" video and said it should not have been posted.
ReplyDelete