A Very Dangerous Mixture of Banality and Backwardness
It almost beggars belief that anything so unenlightened as the "Life in the UK " test should be introduced with any seriousness. As much as anything, it demonstrates the utter bankruptcy of the present government which can assemble and approve this very dangerous mixture of banality and backwardness.
The test actually exposes the depth of the reactionary character of the thinking of the ruling circles, as analysed in the accompanying article, as well as the sickeningly patronising outlook of the government and the authorities towards the human beings who are applying for British citizenship.
The state of citizenship is not something which can be "tested" in the way that knowledge of the rules and practice of driving can be tested by the highway code. To the government, citizenship is a privilege that is can be bestowed upon those it favours. There is no objective nature or principle behind the citizenship test that it is introducing. It is consistent with the thesis that "the rules of the game are changing" and that the government can arbitrarily decide those rules; it is consistent with the pragmatism that "the end justifies the means". In this case some arbitrary and chauvinistic issues with no consistent content are chosen as the means which will justify the granting or not of citizenship, and the test, as part of a whole outlook, aims to exclude from civic society any person who does not measure up against these issues. In this, it is a manifestation of the government's wish to exclude from civil society whole sections of the people it considers undesirable and deprive them of rights as not being a living human person.
That this is so can be seen from the fact that "Life in the UK " hardly even depicts a "way of life", more a "Britishness" that only exists as a caricature, and is being endlessly lampooned as such. It is part of a "justification" for a racist treatment in the context of a glorified "host" community, a "justification" which is a path which ends up in the gas chambers as the "final solution". Residence and citizenship are on the path of being made dependent on learning the "host" community language and "integrating" into its way of life, a way of life which the authorities are seeking to impose as much on the "host" community as on the immigrants. It is already made compulsory that if granted citizenship, immigrants have to attend an official ceremony and swear allegiance to the Queen as "subjects". Arbitrary and draconian legislation, in effect tearing up the rule of law because the laws are not based on settled principle, are brought in on a wave of and as part of a psychosis of fear. This is another reason the "Life in the UK "
scenario is a repugnant charade, presenting an apology for arbitrariness and backwardness that no serious-minded person would defend.
This is not an issue only for those seeking citizenship. The working class and people must take a stand and reject this racist and anti-human programme. The test for citizenship must be withdrawn and the rights of all respected. Not In Our Name!
Government Launches "Citizenship" Tests
New tests, part of what is to provide the basis on which official British citizenship is to be granted, were launched on November 1.
The "Life in the UK " tests cost £34 and consist of 24 questions on British life and culture, institutions and governance and officially defined history and traditions. Applicants must answer 75% of the questions correctly to pass, and are allowed to retake the test until they obtain this mark. There will be 90 centres around Britain in which to take the test.
Applicants to which citizenship is granted will then have to take part in a formal citizenship ceremony, at which they will swear allegiance to the Queen. Apart from figuratively swearing allegiance to the British establishment, the idea is to mark the granting of citizenship with a sense of occasion. "Becoming a British citizen is an important event in your life and is something that you can feel proud of," says the "Life in the UK " website.
Despite government claims that it is "not a test of someone's ability to be British or a test of their Britishness", as said by Immigration Minister Tony McNulty, it is nonetheless, as the last main piece in implementing the 2002 government white paper "Secure Borders, Safe
Haven: Integration with diversity in modern Britain " (see WDIE 2002 Nos.
27 and 29), part of the programme to define citizenship on the grounds of the extent to which people "integrate" and "share in British values", along with further entrenching that language be a consideration in obtaining officially recognised citizenship.
This further muddies the waters in the state-organised confusion between nationality and citizenship, a policy that has been openly implemented by successive governments since the British Nationality Act of 1981. The media is complicit in this confusion. For example, the BBC stated that the test will be taken by people seeking to "become British".
Mr McNulty said: "The measures we are introducing ... will help new citizens to gain a greater appreciation of the civic and political dimension of British citizenship and, in particular, to understanding the rights and responsibilities that come with the acquisition of British citizenship. This will enable new citizens to play a full part in their wider community and will benefit both our society and economy."
This is a clear reference to the Blairite value of "civic duty", where the working citizen is part of a social partnership with the employer, a person patriotic to the state and to the cause of British-based monopolies taking control of world markets. It is also part of the block on people's thinking, attempting to prevent people from seeking alternatives and creating a movement for democratic renewal.
The content of the tests is based on the Home Office pamphlet "Life in the United Kingdom : A Journey to Citizenship", a book that has already been condemned by many for its re-writing of the history of British colonialism, amongst other issues. A direct quote from this book, which clearly exposes the racist outlook of the official circles underlying its content, is:
"For many indigenous peoples in Africa, the Indian subcontinent, and elsewhere, the British Empire often brought more regular, acceptable and impartial systems of law and order than many had experienced under their own rulers, or under alien rulers other than Europeans. The spread of the English language helped unite disparate tribal areas that gradually came to see themselves as nations. Public health, peace, and access to education can mean more to ordinary people than precisely who are their rulers. One legacy of empire was that when nationalism grew most of those who first claimed self-government did so in terms resting heavily on European, on specifically British, ideas of liberty and representative government."
Danny Firth of the Independent Race and Refugee News Network has pointed out that "The handbook is the culmination of two years research by the United Kingdom Advisory Group that was set up by the former home secretary, David Blunkett, following the so-called 'race riots' in several northern towns in the summer of 2001. In the immediate aftermath, British Asian communities were not only held responsible for the violence, but they were portrayed as being insular and inward looking...
"And the history of Britain 's Black communities is also made more palatable. It is confined to a summary of migration since 1945, where a shortage of labour ensured 'for about twenty five years people from the West Indies, India , Pakistan and later Bangladesh , travelled to work and settle in Britain .' There is no mention of the racism that greeted them or the struggles for equality that ensued. And of course there is no reference to the more recent disturbances in Bradford, Burnley and Oldham , where the government's citizenship recommendations originated.
Britain 's ‘official' history has been 'white washed'." (Danny Firth, "The re-imagining of Britain ", http://www.irr.org.uk
It is significant that the violence recently seen in Birmingham, caused by the government's policy of division, which is in turn motivated by the racist ideology underlying that policy, occurred just one week before the introduction of these "citizenship tests". Many commentators have also pointed out that a significant portion of the present population of Britain would likely fail the test. Moreover, the issue has created such controversy that many people would call into question the official "correct" answers, along with their questions. This attack on the principles of citizenship is therefore both an attempt to sow further divisions and an attack on the right to conscience of all residents of Britain , whether officially considered "citizens", "nationals" or otherwise.