Life in Britain: Why it gets a bad name?

Recently, Britain got really bad press. The American right portrays it as a failed state, with violent streets and gangs reminiscent of Danny Boyle's 28 Years Later. And so does the Indian right - bashing up Britain is a parlour game for Indian news channels. 

Britain has many problems. But it is not a failed state. British cities, despite their lack of economic growth and slightly boring life, are far safer than either American or Indian cities. There is indeed knife crime, which is declining, but we don't have school shootings. We had grooming gangs, for sure, but we don't have vigilante gangs poking into our homes checking what we eat or who we worship. Most of the Britons know Nigel Farage what he is - a charlatan - and even when someone suggests that all asylum seekers should be castrated on Live TV, no other panellist rushes to defend her with whataboutery. The public transport is rickety and costly, but I don't have to drive every day to go to my office; the NHS Primary Care is riddled with delays and mistakes, but there is world class acute care for free available to all citizens. Taxes may be high, but the streets are mostly clean, parks are beautiful in summer and there are well-stocked public libraries. There are all kinds of schools, some of them very good, and the vocational training providers and universities do a decent job. There may not be as many billion dollar companies, but Britain supplies entrepreneurs and ideas to Silicon Valley [that it does not happen here has more to do with money than British inventiveness].

Therefore, living in Britain, I am trying to make sense why the global right has such a dim view of it. 

One quick explanation is that Britain is Russia's enemy number one, and the war in Ukraine is really a part of that great game: Hence, the global right wing media mechanism is attempting to undermine the country. I am not a conspiracy theory aficionado, but this one is no conspiracy theory, but textbook PsyOp, which the Russians under Putin are so good at. The same forces were at play in the run up to Brexit, which eroded British power significantly, and therefore, it is entirely logical to see its hand in this. Besides, there is a global platform for right-wing politics, which American and Indian right-wing parties are part of. 

The other simple explanation is Islamophobia. This is a global phenomena, created primarily by America's misadventures in the middle east, consequent civil wars and refugee waves that it caused. This is an accident waiting to happen: It seems that our leaders need a major disaster (if Gaza isn't enough already) to shame them into accepting that this is as much a problem as anti-Semitism was a few generations ago. That Britain remains a relatively open, tolerant and multi-racial society upsets those who want to think of themselves as the greatest country or the world's teacher. 

I have heard people say Britain is socialist, but that is as absurd an allegation there can be. It is as feudal state - everyone has their place and unless one can go back to their childhood and fix their schooling and accent, this can not change - but it is also a co-founder of neo-liberal capitalism, that speculative version where everything is monetised and gamblers rule the roost. It bemoans its industrial legacy and look at China with envy, but can do little to cure its real estate obsession and London-biased economy. But none of this can make the American right to feel bad - they are as much into all this as anyone - and India is now the world's leading neoliberal state. 

Therefore, I tend to think it comes down to the hatred of 'multiculturalism', of which Britain is a shining example. But there is a deep misunderstanding of how British multiculturalism came about or what it is. Far from being a liberal project, British multiculturalism is a product of empire. As its political control waned in the 50s and 60s, the British empire folded inwards. People from post-colonial states (like me) were brought in and given a pre-assigned place and profession in the mini-empire that the British elite continued to run. In that sense, all this multiculturalism is the tool of influence Britain wields, this is what keeps London as the custodian of the world's money (and definitely most of its stolen money) and British schooling system as the world's pre-eminent method of schooling. Britain may not have the navy to project power outside (a role assumed by the Americans now) but it still influences everything in the world through its multiracial multicultural populace.

This is the reason, I believe, Islamophobia is unnatural in Britain, as anti-Semitism was. Churchill had no love lost for the people of Jewish faith, but he supported the Zionist cause of Israel staunchly - because it made sense. At the same time, the British government propped up Pakistan and maintained a cosy relationship with its elite. It is an architecture of influence that was perfected since 1688 and practised with great success around the world. Too many guns, bombs and money make other powers miss this point completely: The American ruling class can only dream of the natural deference that a British commoner has for their elite! 

For all these reasons, Britain can be hated by those 'revolutionaries' on the right, who wants to tear up the democratic order, the institutions and multiculturalism, because it can be anything but. It is a naturally conservative state, which works beautifully, and in which democracy maintains the status quo rather than upending privilege (as Americans think it does).