We all know that Britain is a great home receiver since the first colonization and more after the Second World War but we can ask us if it exist a real melting pot. In spite of the presence of a lot of immigrants, certain person still not considerate them as British citizen even though the government try to give a good picture of the integration in U. K. Actually the coexistence of sharia and British law doesn’t help, because it can’t exist several systems for people who live in the same country.
So, we can ask us if Britain, home receiver, can move from coexistence to the complementarity of British and Sharia laws in order to have a better integration of migrants. In a first time we will talk about the fact that Britain is a country with an ethnic diversity, and then in a second time we will talk about the coexistence of sharia and British laws. When we hear the word Britain we immediately think about colonization, effectively Britain was with France, for instance, one of the biggest colonialist powers.
After the decolonization and World Wars, Britain welcome more and more foreigner, that’s is the reason why we can think that British are used to live with them up to an oneness between us, I mean a melting pot. In a first thought we will see that it is the case, but in a second thought we will understand that it exist some racism against migrants. We will demonstrate that it exist a real melting pot in Britain by some examples.
Firstly, in the XVI and XVIII century blacks peoples lived in the royal entourage, or in rich families, and with the conquest of the New World by Europeans, they became slaves. But after the abolition of slavery in 1800’s, a non-white MP was elected in the House of Commons and Arthur Wharton was the first black professional footballer in the U. K. therefore we can see the rise of a melting pot. It continue during the World War I and the World War II, because immigrants fight with the British, and after with the permission for the Polish to stay in the U. K.
Then there is more and more immigration because British need help in their industries: immigrants represent an important part of the trade (black Britons make a collective contribution of ?5 billion), our particularities cultural are sold and contribute of ?736 million to the UK economy and create jobs. From this time it exist a real mixing of cultures and a great evolution of morals to such an extent that four non-white MP are elected at the same post. Moreover, according to the government, in the U. K. igrants can conserve their cultural identity, their dress code for instance, and this is one of the reason why aliens come in Britain. Immigration seems to be a very good thing without trouble, but this is a discuss which hides the real situation, because actually immigration is sometime rejected by British and can bring discrimination. Indeed, already in 1960’s immigration carried the rise of racial violence and prejudice, so the government legislate to make harder the immigration of non-white MP. Nowadays immigration is limited by the introduction of a Citizen test and a point system: immigrants who live in U.
K. have to pass a citizen test to prove that they know English language and British way of life, in other words, to prove that they are able to live in the U. K and prove that they can settle permanently in the country The problem is that even for people born in Britain the test is too hard, they are unable to answer. We can ask us if this test is in place to “racist” reasons… Regarding the point system, we acquire point in order to become British, this is possible if you have been living in Britain for 5 years, and if you pass the British test.
We can have point in different ways like speaking English, having useful competences, paying taxes, doing voluntary work, being flexible where you live. But this system means that we can work in Britain but not be able to have the Britain identity, it breaks the link between temporary migration for work and permanent residence. It stills a limiting measure. But even with this solution, Conservatives aren’t happy, because to their mind the system isn’t tough enough, and the mainstream parties of the population share this point of view. Are British hostile to the came of the immigrants?
Yes, because they fear immigration as an issue, because recession threats British jobs, so if there isn’t enough job for British, it’s may be “abnormal” that there is a job for an immigrant. Currently we are far of the melting pot. This is proved by the news rules to come in Britain. The goal of this new rule is that families or person with foreign partner are able to manage their own life. That is the reason why, they have to have a minimum gross income. If they have not, they are not allowed to integrate UK even if they are in love with a British. Your spouse has to be affluent enough to support you.
It’s mean it is harder to rejoin your spouse in UK if you are foreigner. Because the taxpayer should not be ask to pay for foreigners. To conclude with this first point, we retain that the multiculturalism in UK who is presented like a perfect thing without problems, is in reality a mixing of discrimination and fear from part of British. We will now illustrate that with the conflict caused by the coexistence of British and Sharia laws. Should the complementarity of those two laws be able to erase the tense caused by the complementarity of those two laws?
We will study in a first time the disadvantages of coexistence and in a second time the advantages of one complementarity. The presence of Sharia law in the U. K is considerate as a problem because the system creates a parallel legal system and thus breaks the rule of equality before the law, effectually even Non-Muslims use sharia law to settle their disputes. But the problem is that in Sharia council there are no lawyers, no judges, no appeals and the rulings rendered by Sharia councils have not legal standing.
The worst is the fact that this system is discriminatory because when women divorce the child custody is automatically given to the father! That is the reason why a bill was introduced before Parliament to ban Sharia court. The Government thinks that British law should apply in this country based on British values and must rule over Sharia law, I mean, they have to accept the view that the rights of an individual are more important than anything else and the fact that they have not to impose any kind of religious law in a secular country.
Moreover, Sharia law is very ancient and does not correspond to our modern society, it applies principals that are sometimes contrary to British common law and it may represent a first step in the creation of a Islamic State in Britain. This is although the idea of the group “Muslims against the Crusades” which want to create Sharia controlled zone in three boroughs in London. So, the coexistence of those two laws is tense. Despite this difficult cohabitation, an ntroduction of certain point of the Sharia law in the British law should be a good idea to calm the tense between British and Muslims. In fact if people live in the same country but has different legal system because of their religion, that promote division. That is the reason why Archbishop of Canterbury is in favor of an adoption in British law of certain aspects of sharia law to help maintain social cohesion and to make more easy the life of British Muslims because they don’t have to choose between cultural loyalty and state loyalty.
But this idea won’t be apply if Muslims don’t admit that women are not like a second class citizen. To conclude, Britain has every interest to move from coexistence to one complementarity of Sharia and British laws. It can help Britain to have a better picture of ethnic diversity and reduce the racism. We can ask us if it exist the same problem with laws of another ethnic group