Of flowers and bees…

Recently, in an interview English cricketer Flintoff had spoken bluntly on the issue of ‘multiculturalism’ in Britain. Flintoff felt that immigrants should try to assimilate in the English society instead of insulating themselves and staying within packs. He pointed out that the ‘bling and bang’ culture popular with Jamaicans was accentuated criminal activity and to an extent glamorised it. He also spoke strongly against East Europeans who come to England looking for jobs and don’t even make an effort to learn English. All this caused an uproar in England and Freddie was castigated for his ‘fascist’ views. Even today, in an article in the Times the current England T-20 captain Paul Collingwood said that it felt weird being booed in their own country and with the India’s exit he hoped to see ‘ a more English environment ‘.

Some time back, the French Government banned the wearing of all religious symbols inside public schools. It was observed that the students were segregated along religious lines and this ghetto culture caused isolation in the society at large.They felt that every child should be equal in a school, there shouldn’t be any grounds for segregation. So, they banned wearing of crucifixes, the taqiyahs and turbans. The Sikh community in France and India was up in arms. They appealed to the French Government to allow Sikh children to wear turbans on the grounds that their faith made it mandatory. The Indian PM was also forced to take up the matter with Nicolas Sarkozy at the Republic Day celebrations. Thankfully, the French stood resolute. This was secularism at it’s best – ‘ State and Religion are separate and all religions are equal ‘. The message was quite clear – If you want the privileges, you have to abide by the law.

There have been other emblematic incidents – In Netherlands, the burka has been partially banned . It is easy to understand the reason – Women refuse to remove the veil even for security personnel and doctors. The Dutch lawmakers argue that theirs’ is a free and liberal country. They have their ideals and their culture which must be respected by one and all. Is it so wrong to ask immigrants too to adjust and to adapt ? Why should the natives carry all the burden ?

In Wales, a sikh girl was asked to remove her ‘kadha’ after the school banned wearing of all bracelets and jewelery. She took the issue to court and got a favorable verdict. The court decided that the spirit of the ban was to restrict wearing of embelishments and hers was not an embelishment. In England, the Hindus and the Sikhs are asking the revocation of a ban against open air cremations. Now, burning of human carcasses in public would certainly offend a lot of people there. So, it was sensibly suggested that the cremation sites be situated in isolated areas so as not to create any offense. The courts are still to decide on the issue.

The point being that it is alright if these countries expect their immigrant population to behave in a more assimilative manner. The immigrants must realize that their adopted countries expect somethings when they open their doors to them. They shouldn’t be expected to tolerate quasi states to sprouting within their borders. Having said that the native populations must try and understand that the immigrants will always have a connection to their motherland but that doesn’t mean that they’re only parasites. The relationship is like that of flowers and bees, the immigrants are like bees who come to the flowers for nectar and the countries are like flowers who too get something in return for the nectar.

As for Freddie and Paul, I think they fully appreciate the fact that these immigrants contribute to England as well, especially in cricket – Nasser Hussein, Panesar, Shah etc etc. They’d just like a little support when they play against India and Pakistan. The rest of the time, we can be at each others’ throats !

1. What is Indian ? Winston Churchill once said of India – ‘ India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation...