PEGIDA, IMMIGRATION AND THE NETTLE THE LEFT IS FAILING TO GRASP

When a person I regard as quite liberal expresses some sort of support for some of the precepts of Pegida, then I know that we western Europeans - and probably further afield too - have a problem. And whatever it is that Pegida have tapped into with my aforementioned friend, they have managed to identify in others across Europe as well - indeed I have seen Monday night Pegida demonstrations in Rotterdam and Oslo, and we in the UK have our own 'Pegida Lite' manifestation in UKIP.

So what is it that is bothering people - and I don't mean the usual demographic of unemployed, uneducated casual racists on the right - but the more centrist, better educated middle classes? I suggest it is loss of national identity. Now, one has to be very careful about using the 'N' word, and the Left get deeply uncomfortable with nationalism - but I think a distinction needs to be drawn between nationalism  - and patriotism. But back to 'identity'. Citizens of a country like to know where they belong, what their country, society stands for. Very often they believe there are certain aspects of their country that quintessentially express their national characteristic, as they see it. And the problem of increasing immigration is that immigrants, for whatever reason, are not being assimilated into society, and are not identifying themselves with their new home country.

This is for a number of reasons. Firstly, many immigrants are poorly educated and, as such, poorly equipped for earning a living wage in Europe in the current economic state we are in, and thus are immediately thrown onto whatever welfare state provisions that exist. This creates some resentment amongst some existing inhabitants.   The second consequence of the economic downturn is that host countries lack the resources and (or aren't prepared) to spend money in the areas needed to assimilate immigrants successfully. Furthermore, because the existing nationals of the country are already struggling to have a decent standard of living, this creates resentment of the incomes, who they see as making their share of 'the pie' smaller than it might otherwise have been. So far so familiar, for any downturn since 1945. However, increased mobility and increased inequality means these issues are more exaggerated than ever before.

Therefore, however well immigrants are integrated into a society, however well they assimilate and identify with their adopted country, there will always be a fringe element of right wing xenophobes for whom any immigrants are unacceptable. The challenge for democratic governments is to manage assimilation well enough to ensure that such elements remain at the margins, and that Pegida like groups do not gain critical mass and move the governments of Europe to the right in the way that was seen in the 1930s.

A good example to look at here is that of Australia in 1989, and their approach to multiculturalism. in which it was perfectly acceptable for the citizen-immigrant to express their cultural identity - balanced by an obligation to accept the rule of law, parliamentary democracy, freedom of speech & religion, English as the national language and equality of the sexes. Everyone should have a 'primary loyalty to Australia'. Thus there is an in-built citizenship test, and an approach to multiculturalism that integrates ethnic and cultural minorities as citizens.

To me, this is the crux of citizenship and patriotism: where does one's 'primary loyalty' lie - or, putting it bluntly: Who do you cheer for at an international team sporting event? How do you make immigrants patriots? And how do you define the essence of 'German-ness' or 'Dutch-ness'?
Unfortunately, the Left / social democrats tend to avoid talking about patriotism, seeing it as akin to nationalism. The danger of this is that it leaves the field open to the far right. But patriotism as a virtue, a loyalty that motivates citizens to make sacrifices for the improvement of their country and sees its public institutions as their own and readily contribute to its flourishing, is entirely laudable. Rich tax avoiders who manage their tax affairs out of tax havens very often consider themselves patriots - but how can anyone  who undermines the public purse and therefore public institutions, institutions that make their society what it is, ever be true patriots?

So if we fail to assimilate immigrants as citizens, if we allow them to ghetto-ize themselves, set themselves aside, resentment grows and society is divided. Similarly one has to question whether faith schools help this process, help understanding of wider society. Or do they contribute to divided sections of society which at best doesn't understand other sections, and at worst is openly hostile.

In all of our countries governments have to outline the vision of what our society is, what it stands for and educate all elements of society as to the values that society holds dear. It has to identify the national cultural issues and nurture them, and make citizens proud of them. Most of all, it has to make all citizens feel they belong and that behaving as a profoundly different group within the society within which you have settled, is unacceptable. You have to want to wear the national flag at the Olympic Games if you, like Mo Farrah, a Somali refugee, happen to win the 10,000 metres.
If we fail to integrate immigrants, if we fail to define, protect and nurture the cultural values that are precious to each of our countries, Pegida, or Pegida like organisations will gain strength and we will be back in the 1930s. Because immigration isn't going to go away.