Integration in France and Britain - Term Paper Example

Integration in France and Britain There are many researchers and analysts who argue that the concept of British racialization emerged between 1940s-1970s. However, in the book ‘The idea of race’, Banton successfully argues that the idea of racialization in Europe existed before 1940s but it was not as publicized as it is now. During the period earlier than 1940s the issues and decision about immigrants and race inequalities were dealt with and solved confidentially (Banton ,1977 pp. 20-30). The main purpose of hiding such discussions from public was to prevent the probable Political confusion. In the starting years of 1940s, public became more concerned about the issues related to immigrants and discussions related to ethnic issues captured the attentions of a huge portion of population. During 1940s and 1950s, both politicians and general public of Britain, realized the importance and necessity of forming and designing the policies for immigrants for the economic welfare of the country and to avoid any ethnic conflict (Small & Solomos, 2006: pp. 236-247). During this period it was also observed that to avoid any sense of bias against the native population only a limited number of immigrants should be allowed in the country. The idea of limited immigrants was also proposed to help the government maintain peace and justice among the people. When this controllable amount of immigrants has been attained the attention shifted towards the residents and their needs (Solomos, 2003 pp. 102-106). Britain faced a great trouble of insufficient labor workforce right after the 2nd world war. To fill this gap between the existing and required labor force, the British government allowed Irish labor to enter the boundaries of Britain and to serve their country’s demand. The Irish immigrants were also limited to meet the requirement and hence Black people from the Caribbean and Asians entered in Britain. A number of conflicts also entered the country with this labor workforce. Due to the increasing number of conflicts and attacks of white population on the black people it became necessary to take some proper step. The Commonwealth immigrations Act 1968 was proposed in order to pacify the fears of the indigenous white population about the increasing black population in the country. The act of 1968 denied to follow the policy of automatic right to entry and abode to the immigrated black and Asian citizens (Carter et al., 1987, ). The public policies of restricting the number of immigrants were intended to achieve two basic aims. The first was to encourage the existing minorities to integrate with the British population. To attain this aim the government founded different agencies to control the discrimination in the areas of employment, education and residency of the minority groups. The establishment of National Committee for Commonwealth Immigrants in the early 1960s and latter in the 1960s the Community Relations Commissions and the Local Community Relations Councils can be seen as an example of the governments efforts. These committees were intended to improve the relationships of majority and minority groups and to translate the requirements of each group in a way which would be reasonable and clear to the other group. The second aim of the public policies was to develop better community relations and understanding by stopping new immigration. The basic idea behind restricting the number of immigrants was to integrate a preset quantity of outside population in the British way of living and to persuade them on accepting the British ethnicity and values (Fenton 2003, pp. 40-42). Throughout the history of Britain, the successive governments made many promises to practice the equality of rights, education, facilities, ethical requirements and residency but up till 1990s no progress was observed (Madood et al., 1997). France has a huge population of Muslims living in its territories and thus this population is greatly affected by the integration policies laid down by the French. The integration policies as mentioned above have tried since the very beginning to assimilate the Muslim minorities into the French culture. To a certain extent this has been possible but even after getting the citizenship of France the Muslims tend to go through the problem of bias and discrimination. This type of discrimination in France can clearly be proved if one compares the number of the Muslim citizens and the number of the citizens from the other communities. It can be clearly seen that Muslim citizens are being left behind or being less privileged over their peer citizens. Further after 11th September 2001 Muslims in France are further being propelled as strangers to the French society. Similarly discrimination can also been seen in France against Muslims when they are following their religion. One such case which proves this is when a student was disallowed to wear a ‘hijab’ in her school. The muslims of France consider wearing a ‘hijab’ as an identity symbol and this greatly affects their emotions about their religion. Further another case can be noted here in which the Muslim students are not provided with ‘halal’ food in their school which is obligatory for the muslims to eat in their religion. Moreover, holidays on Christmas are granted to the students but not the holidays of Eid. Eid is a religious festival of the Muslims. The above given example of banning the scarf in schools clearly shows that France does not promote secularism but rather discourages it. On one hand the Muslim individuals are discouraged or banned to show their identity while on the other hand Christians are not banned from wearing their crosses or religious symbols. France is a state which is widely known for its policies of integration and is now look upon to for its policies by other states also. After the Second World War the numbers of immigrants in the Western world were seen to be increasing. These immigrants were mostly from states across the Mediterranean from countries like Turkey, Algeria, Morocco and Pakistan. These immigrants at first were not seen as a possible inclusion in the structure of the states to which they were immigrating but as these numbers rose the states had to form a policy of integration (Immigrants and Minorities, pp.298-300). This policy of integration used in France is also known to be historical as the French are known to integrate many other civilizations into their state successfully. These civilizations include the regions of Burgundy Brittany and Provence. All these states had a different culture and civilization if analyzed but with the integration policies of the French these autonomous states were able to merge in the French society. After the World War II the French government formed such integration policies so as to all the Muslims could adjust in the new state. The historical integration policy used by the French is also known as “integration à la Francaise” (Heckman, Friedrich, ‘National modes of immigrant integration’, pg 101.) . The French society always had an aim to integrate migrants into the French society through their systems and legislations. According to the approach of French towards integration the immigrants have to leave behind their culture and image and adapt to the new culture and image. This means that if the immigrants have to settle in the territory they have to be called French themselves. If the historical background of both France and Britain is closely analyzed, then it can be seen that the approach towards integration between these two countries is different than each other. (Heckman, Friedrich, ‘National modes of immigrant integration’, 102). The picture of Britain today, however, is different. The recent research carried out by the Commission of Racial Equality has concluded that the central Government Departments now base their decisions on the principle f equality while recruitment and selection of the employee. The Race Relations Act 2000 may be considered as an important step in making this progress. The act aims to avoid ethnic discrimination beforehand and judges the people belonging to different races according to a single rule. The public bodies are held responsible to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination and the establishment of good relationships among the people of different groups (CRE, 2003 & Faulkner 2004, pp 01-14). The philosophy adopted by France in terms of integration is related to the assimilation of its culture and identity. From the historical background it clearly can be viewed that France is one of the state which always promotes its own identity over others and asks the immigrants to adopt the identity of the state only. The state requires the immigrants to leave behind their origin and begin anew as French nationals in the state (Favell , 2001 pp. 40-50).This assimilation policy of France has been quite known throughout the world however it has not proved to be that much successful as it once used to be. The identity of the French people is given more preference over the immigrants’ in France. Whereas in Britain they have two way integration method where immigrants can adapt both to their own culture and to the new culture they are brought into (Favell 2001, pp. 1-6). Around 1.5 to 2 million of the Muslim population is residing in Britain (Sutcliffe, 2004: p. 245). The Muslim population in Britain is increasing day by day. This fact shows that their level of comfort and ease to follow their religious rules in Britain is enough to grab the attention of other Muslims. There is no discrimination in employment opportunities for Muslims. However, Muslims had difficulties in overcoming the language barriers but with the passing time and constant struggles, this problem is resolved greatly. Islam gives full protection to Muslim women and does not permit the women to work outside their houses. Islam puts this responsibility on their men (fathers, brothers and husbands) to earn for them and to help and protect them. However, there are certain circumstances in which she is allowed to help the family financially. For example if a woman does not have any such relative, the religion permits her to work but doesn’t allow her to go against the shar’iah (obligations of Islam). Moreover, Islam also allows women to work if their men (as mentioned above) allow her to work or if the women want to defeat the financial crisis. In Muslim countries, these religious principles are properly transmitted to the new generation via teachings, culture and environment. However, it becomes difficult to teach these religious beliefs to the Muslim children (Ansari, 2004: pp. 276-9). In a country like Britain, they are taught about the equality of rights on the basis of gender, race and religion hence the Muslim parents used to expostulate about the women employment and used to dislike it. This dislike also became a part of the integration process and the statistics of mid 1990s revealed that more Muslim women participate in the employment sector than the non-Muslims. The PSI survey explained that 42% of women are Muslim in the labor market as compared to 36% of other Asian women (Brown, 1984: p. 187).Around 74% of the women in labor market belong to Pakistan or Bangladesh (Madood et al., 1997: p. 88). This increasing trend of Muslim women’s participation in labor market may be due to their interaction with the culture and people of Britain. Whatsoever is the reason but it has proved that nothing can and should be enforced on people either on religious or cultural basis but the people must be given their rights to choose a way for themselves. And this is what the British policy adheres to. The diverse Muslim populations in Britain play very different roles and hence their pace of development in British society also varies. In this regard, Bangladeshi and Somali Muslims can be taken as an example (Goodhart, pp 102-105). Somalis are more conscious about their independence and autonomy, whereas, Bangladeshis are more motivated to follow the strict rules of Islam. Somalis, hence take part in all social activities in Britain. They are more motivated to work and learn the British ways of life. This motivation led them to learn the language of Britain and also made it possible for them to interact with other unrelated people. They are self motivated to widen their social circle. All these features helped them to achieve a much higher living standard than the Bangladeshis who do no accept and adopt the changes brought in by the new culture (Lewis, 2005, pp. 539-550). Their dress code, language differences and cultural and moral values keep them isolated. The dress and language barriers make it difficult for them to participate in employments as Somalis (buijs, 1993: pp83-98). The approach of integration by British and French is different in the terms that British support multiculturalism whereas the French support assimilation of their own culture (Wieviorka, pp 881-890). The British integration allows one to settle in the environment while keeping their origins with themselves. The immigrants are not forced to adapt to the new identity of the state they are in. Whereas in France it is totally opposite as the immigrants are forced to adopt the culture and identity of the state in which they are living. The immigrants following Islam in French have fallen a direct prey to their policies (Geddes 2003, 102). As the French society asks the immigrants to assimilate the new culture, it is quite hard for the Muslim society to leave behind their religion and adapt to the conditions which are not allowed in their religion. Thus the immigrants who follow Islam resist the change which is being brought onto them. The intensity of the integration policy of French can clearly be seen in the recent incident of the ban on scarves. Wearing a scarf is considered to be ethical in Islam and forcing someone not to follow his religion is considered to be oppressive. This clearly illustrates that the French are forcing their identity on the Muslim people and such an identity is not looked upon to in their religion (Begag pp. 75-76). Similarly on the other hand the British approach towards integration is different from that of the French. It gives the immigrants a flexible environment where they can practice their own religion and cultural aspects in their own way. This flexible environment also includes the environment of the British amalgamated into it thus this means that both the environment of the immigrant and the host is preserved in such integration. However this approach has proved to be wrong if viewed rationally as the approach has given rather greater flexibility to these immigrants. These immigrants are given so much flexibility that they can now form their own segregated communities thus this approach of integration proves to be wrong here. Thus multiculturalism as practiced by British can be said to be wrong (Musterd, pp 630-635). However in some cases it can be seen that even the British society does not accept some of the norms of the religion Islam. The recent case in which a British girl had to fight for her right to wear a scarf clearly shows that even in Britain Muslim individuals are discouraged to follow their religion. This makes the integration policy of the Britain weak too as the individuals cannot follow their religion properly. It is only because of these integration approaches that these muslims feel alienated and stuck in the new environment in which they are being brought up in Heckman, Friedrich, ‘National modes of immigrant integration;, in: Bosswick, Wolfgang and Charles Husband ed. Comparative European Research in Migration, Diversity and Identities (University of Duesto, Bilbao 2005, 99-112). The approaches of both these states differ on a broader perspective, however both these states aim to have a better community altogether (van den Berghe pp. 430-435 & Abraham 2007, 93-96). In Britain, there is a Muslim law at an official level to facilitate and represent Muslims. However, Muslims cannot deny the English law which is sovereign. There are certain laws in England which are not compatible with the principles of Islam. Marriage is one of those cases where a conflict has been observed. According to Islam, religious marriages are enough to declare a man and woman as ‘married’. Moreover, Islamic law doesn’t necessarily require the spouses to be present when the marriage contract is made. The spouses may send their acceptance by a representative on their behalf. However, the English law disagrees with both of these rules. English law makes it obligatory for the husband and wife to be present when the contract is made. English know recognizes only civil marriages and rejects all other religious ceremonies. However, there are no laws to stop the religious ceremonies but there is an obligation to follow the English law procedure. These distinct laws made the procedure of marriages difficult for the Muslims. They are bound to follow both the procedures in order to meet the social and religious obligations (yilmaz, p. 348). This step of Muslims of following both the laws show the flexibility in their attitudes towards others culture and values. This consideration of Muslims led them to survive and develop in Britain and other countries (Yilmaz, 2002: pp. 343-350). It is obvious from the research that integration is not merely a result of philosophies but the process that requires consideration and support from the minority groups and local citizens. However the government policies play the most important role in assimilating the immigrants in their society. Both British (ethnicity model) and French (citizenship model) approaches carry their own importance and thus the good points from both the integration should be picked up for a perfect approach towards integrating immigrants. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Banton, M. (1977). The idea of race. London: Tavistock Publications. Heckman, Friedrich, ‘National modes of immigrant integration;, in: Bosswick, Wolfgang and Charles Husband ed. Comparative European Research in Migration, Diversity and Identities (University of Duesto, Bilbao 2005) 99-112. GEDDES, A. (2003). The politics of migration and immigration in Europe. Sage politics texts. London, SAGE Publications. Small, S., & Solomos, J. (2006). Race, Immigration and Politics in Britain: Changing Policy Agendas and Conceptual Paradigms 1940s-2000s. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY. 47 (3/4), 235-258. Solomos, J. (2003). Race and racism in Britain. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Commission for Racial Equality. (2003). The law, the duty, and you: The race relations act and the duty to promote race equality : a guide for employees. London: Commission for Racial Equality. Sutcliffe, S. (2004). Religion: Empirical studies. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate. Ansari, H. (2004). "The infidel within": Muslims in Britain since 1800. London: Hurst and. Yilmaz, I. (2002). The challenge of post-modern legality and Muslim legal pluralism in England. JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES. 28, 343-354. Buijs, G. (1993). Migrant women: Crossing boundaries and changing identities. Cross-cultural perspectives on women, v. 7. Oxford [England]: Berg. Brown, C. (1984). Black and white Britain: The third PSI survey. London: Heineman Educational. Wieviorka, M. (1998) Is multiculturalism the solution? Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 21 (5): pp. 881-909 van den Berghe, P. L. (2002) Multicultural democracy: can it work?, Nations and Nationalism Vol. 8 (4): pp 433-449 Musterd, S. (2003) Segregation and integration: a contested relationship, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, Vol. 29 (4): pp. 623-41 Goodhart, D. (2004) Is Britain becoming too diverse? Prospect, February: pp. 98-107 Immigrants and Minorities, Vol. 22 (2-3): pp. 298-315 Favell, A. (2001) Philosophies of Integration: Immigration and the Idea of Citizenship in France and Britain, Palgrave, Basingstoke Begag, A. (2007) Ethnicity and Equality: France in the Balance, University of Nebraska Press Fenton, S. (2003) Ethnicity, Polity, London Faulkner, D. (2004). Civil renewal, diversity and social capital in a multi-ethnic Britain. Runnymede perspectives. London: Runnymede Trust. Lewis, G. (2005). Welcome to the margins: Diversity, tolerance, and policies of exclusion. ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES. 28 (3), 536-558. Abraham, S. (2007). Multiracialism as more than the sum of ethnicities. RACE AND CLASS. 49 (2), 91-99. Read More