Author: safa

Categories
Journal

Peeking at Black Britain Through the Diachronic Looking Lens: An analysis of the lives of Black Britain post-World War II

by Safa Tonuzi

Introduction of the Author and Purpose

I envisioned myself partaking studying abroad while in college in since I was a freshman in high school. My intention derived from the fact of experiencing a culture, a movement, or a phenomenon that invoked a sense inspiration to propel me in certain direction for my studies and ultimately into life. So, this winter I determined that I would take the steps to lead me to the next steps One thing led to the next, and I ended up being accepted into King’s College in London. I plan to coincide my studies here at Chapel HiIl As a member of the Colonialism & Postcolonialism course, I feel a responsibility to further my studies as a sociocultural anthropologist and explore how the Brits intervened in internal diverse populations. More specifically, I wanted to take a closer look in. an area that is not too far from the college I plan to study at. I see this as a chance to develop a sort of preliminary research project to supplement a course I plan to take while abroad. In this paper I plan to explore postcolonial theories through the lens of postcolonial theorists and apply it. I will utilize a diachronic approach to explore Black Britain throughout three distinct time periods: The Windrush immigration, The Brixton Race Riots, and the Windrush Scandal to examine how colonial sentiments, master-slave dialectic, and recursitivity play in role in Black Britain’s attempt to break away from colonial structure.

First Look: 1948 The Arrival of the Windrush

The Windrush was a ship that sailed to the Caribbean and essentially shipped its citizens back over to Britain. After World War II, The United Kingdom needed laborers because of the labor shortages and the damage left as a result of war. It is worthy to note that from the start of the journey of Caribbean migrants, British officials did not fully disclose the type of labor they would require from the Windrush immigrants. British authority entertained the idea that the Caribbeans would have a better life in London or wherever the Windrush would take them. This ideology is harmful because it projects a dehumanized version onto the immigrants and their descendants. And what my research finds is that this projection resulted in forms of decolonization and wrongdoings by British authority that local activists revealed. Moreso, even if the British portrayed themselves as a coalition needing more members for workforce and looking toward their colonies who they knew they were stripping of wealth and opportunity. It is a form of enlightened self-interest. Enlightened self-interest, in my definition, means the act of doing something deemed as good with the motivation that it benefits you. In this case, the United Kingdom brought people from their colonies over to help the situation of the United Kingdom’s ruins from war, and it made it seem like they were granting opportunity to inhabitants of their colonies. Wrong.

For additional context, places like Jamaica – what majority of the Windrush generation consisted of – were British colonies and ruled by the Brits meaning they were not independent of their colonizers. This situation becomes wishy washy because when the Windrush generation immigrated to Britain for jobs they were never guaranteed nor granted citizenship. Many of the immigrants assumed or rather deceived into assuming that the process of immigrating included receiving citizenship. This was not the case. Nowadays, you cannot even work a job in a lot of countries without citizenship let alone in a developed country. Moreso, the journey to the United Kingdom was not free. Passengers were required to pay £28 for passage fees and then an additional £5 once the ship sailed (Royal Museums Greenwich, 2022). This really makes the intentions of British officials questionable, and makes the exchange seem more like indentured servitude rather than an act of compassion. The British did not mention that most of these job vacancies were not due to a lack of labor but rather a lack of want in certain that certain occupation. Most of the jobs that required occupation involved tedious, difficult, unpleasant work the locals did not want to partake in. The practice of exploiting people and their resources was not foreign to the British, but rather it sounds quite familiar. Much of the transportation system in the United Kingdom made possible by the Windrush generation.

Second Look: 1984 Brixton Race Riots –– The Heart

The Windrush generation and their respective descendants began to concentrate in an area in South London called Brixton. Brixton holds important context because it is home to Railton Road where the intense but – as we will examine with Fanon – necessary actions needed to hold the colonizers accountable. Most of Brixton’s population consisted of the second generation of Windrush, meaning the children of the original immigrants. Many of Windrush’s second generation were frustrated with British treatment toward them and their parents. The area of Brixton was heavily policed compared to other neighborhoods and the British deemed the Windrush’s immigration status as invaluable; therefore, many of the Windrush generation were considered illegal, leaving much of the Windrush generation either to fend for themselves or even homeless. As Windrush migrant Johnny Samuels says, “I was at work, and I was told that my work had to cease because I have no papers to show that I am a citizen of this country” (BBC, 2021). Samuels reveals that much of the generation suffered basic human rights stripped away from them with no notice by British officials. With no citizenship, many could not access housing, healthcare, and ironically – jobs. Unfortunately, but also revealingly, these actions show the true intentions of the Brits at the time.

The Brits exploited their colonies and had a proposition to take the people of the countries they were already exploiting and exploit their labor more directly under the guise of opportunity and a better life ­– or at least that was the impression of many migrants coming from the Caribbean. More chillingly, the Brits brought these Caribbean migrants over with no plan of granting citizenship which makes me question how the Brits planned on getting the migrants back. The Brits didn’t want the work to seem temporary because it would tamper their own reputation. I speculate that British officials intentionally disregarded the citizenship status because they knew they would get them to leave one way or another after they completed their role – another form of colonial exploitation.

While many of the Windrush generation remained complacent out of fear of deportation, their naturalized children had other prerogatives and less limitations. What happened on April 10, 1981, has many different points of views, but this paper focuses more closely on the context of the violence that ensued after the fuel of the initial stabbing as well as a closer examination of the response that followed by both parties – the rioters and the police. It must be known that no singular event led to up to the race riots, but rather the race riots reflected a boiling over of preexisting tensions and sentiments.

 I find it interesting and revealing that the Brixton race riots did not become from direct police or rather colonial violence – it was more implicit. Thinking back to the master-slave dialectic, the Brixton race riots stemmed from a culmination of emotion and being – to state it simply ­– fed up. Despite popular belief, participants in the race riots did not only consist of gang members, but also intellects. Hegel’s master-slave dialectic explains the relationship between the oppressed and the oppressor. One of the cory principles of this theory states that an individual’s perception of self-worth and self-consciousness inherently coincides with their status within a societal structure. The nuance in this theory lies at the line of when two individuals must interact with one another, but one individual must have the authority and power over the individual. The intellectual discussion conjures the following questions: Who truly holds the power? the oppressor or the oppressed? The master-slave dialectic questions in a situation where the oppressed disallows the oppressor to project his own authority – which is subjective to him and society, but not inherent to his person ­– who is truly the individual with more power? Well, the master-slave dialectic reveals that the oppressed beholds the power and the oppressor relies on the projection of the oppressed for their power. The same phenomenon occurred at Brixton during the 1980s.

Brixton was a hub for Black excellence, art, and literature and, much like Harlem, which was frightening to the British. They wanted members to assimilate to create hegemony as Gramsci would put it. When there is culture, there is solidarity, and solidarity allows marginalized groups to fight back from their oppressors.

The Windrush’s second generation rebelled because of the unfair treatment by the Brits toward their parents and toward themselves. Moreover, the lack of response and commitment to saving Michael Bailey’s life, a victim of a lethal stabbing invoked the riots. For a heavily policed area to not respond adequately to the community did not make sense. The Brit’s blatant intent to instill fear was the only thing that made sense. what I mentioned earlier about the dehumanized approach British officials had on the Windrush immigrants? We can correlate that to the lack of response and aid provided by British police in that moment. Referring to Fanon, who states, “decolonization is always a violent event,” and elaborates on the inherent cruel nature of colonialism and the language of colonialism being violence and the only way to communicate back is through violence.

In an article I found, it states, Railton Road was “crime ridden and run-down” (Guidetags, 2022). But this author fails to mention the rich culture in Railton Road. Black intellectuals like Linton Kwesi Johnson who used the race riots as anecdotes to reflect in his poetry and his overall experience as a Black man during this volatile time and beyond. The article also does not elaborate why Railton Road was considered a low-income area. The area, inhabited by the Windrush generation, was considered impoverished because their illegal immigrant status stripped the work away from them. This same article also makes it seem the reason the riots ensued because the residents had nothing better to do. It is important to call out the ignorance and lack of depth of these articles and really emphasize how the importance of subaltern studies. Subaltern studies allow us to view another vantage point to a given event and usually uplifts the voices of the marginalized groups who are severely underrepresented.

Third Look: 2018-present – The Windrush Scandal & Re-colonization

This section will most likely be the most frightening and unsettling. After years upon years of wrongdoings by British officials including but not limited to deportation and denial of basic human rights. A lot of issue stems from the broken promises attributed by the British. Many Caribbean immigrants were underwhelmed by the conditions provided by places like London. A lot of these immigrants were functioning members of society back home and lured into becoming indentured servants unbeknownst to them. Despite the number of deportations and broken families, the United Kingdom believed compensating victims or relatives of victims with £10,000 could repair the damages caused by them. Even more frustrating, a lot of the Windrush generation and their relatives are still in the queue to receiving reparative compensations (BBC, 2021). Some of the Windrush generation has even passed before even receiving a basic apology from British Parliament. Currently, activists are criticizing the slow nature of the compensation. Out of the fifth of the generation who was come forward for the compensation, only a fourth of that fifth has received some form of compensation. Although in words, parliament speaks as if they are passionate about making things right, their actions speak otherwise. This shows not only the performativism utilized by parliament, but it also shows colonial remnants still left over from directly after the post-war period. The Parliament is making it extremely difficult for the Windrush generation and their relatives to receive the proper compensations for the trauma inflicted upon them by British Parliament. These individuals must have adequate documentation to prove their status which is contradictory to the whole situation because a lot of these people never received adequate documentation.

To make matters even worse, an area that was so vibrant and filled with Caribbean culture is now starting to see the downward spiral of gentrification and white washing. If you look at Figure A in the Appendix, you can see a stark difference of what a marketplace in Brixton used to look during the 80s compared to what you might see now. Going back to a concept learned throughout the course, we can think about architecture as a slow, lurking form of violence and domination. Additionally, as you see in Figure B signs that celebrated the culture and proudly labeled the area as Brixton have been taken down to make the area more palatable to its new rising influx of younger white people. Not only is this a form of erasure it is a blatant yet sneaky form of hegemony which British officials attempted to execute when the Windrush generation first arrived in London. As more white people move into the area, the area becomes more expensive and pushes out the history. Although the violence is not as explicit as it was during the race riots, we must acknowledge and recognize the colonial recursivity at play here. During the race riots, British police officers felt a threat by the rich culture in Brixton. Many agree that Brixton has a vibrant atmosphere, so it is no surprise that people wanted to live there. So essentially, British officials were jealous that their attempts of hegemony did not work and as a result kicked the Windrush generation out their area by making their citizenship status illegal. This process allowed white people of Britain to begin their infiltration of the sacred area.

Some people do not understand the problem of white people infiltrating a minority place. A lot of media has led people into believing that processes like gentrification benefit communities because they make them safer and more trendy-looking. Moreso, at the surface-level it looks like integration and coexisting, but when we peel back these layers, gentrification is really a form of colonial recursivity. Taking a minority safe space and imposing white people, when there already have been racial tension, does not fix the coexisting issue, if anything it exacerbates it.  

The Conclusion

After using a diachronic approach to look at Black Britain, we can see the perpetual exploitation and inconsideration committed by the British onto the Black Population in Britain. From the start, the British had plans to continue to exploit their colonies at a closer proximity but guised their intentions as a white-savior complex which ultimately led to the dismay of coexistence in London. The dissonance was seen during the Brixton Race Riots when, referring to the master-slave dialectic and Fanon, the people of Brixton established their dominance and met law enforcement with their colonial language of violence. However, now British officials are taking a more insidious and subtle approach with the gentrification of an area that was so rich with Black culture and history. The recursivity of colonialism is prevalent in Black Britain and the response provided by Black Britain also plays a major role in their history.

Appendix

Figure A*

Figure B*

*Photo extracted from Metro online publishing, refer to bibliography

Bibliography

BBC. 2021. “Windrush Generation: Who Are They and Why Are They Facing Problems?” BBC. November 24, 2021. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43782241.

Black Cultural Archives. 2023. “Brixton Uprising 1981.” Google Arts & Culture. 2023. https://artsandculture.google.com/story/brixton-uprising-1981-black-cultural-archives/FgXBwW9BGSVDJQ?hl=en.

Guidetags. 2022. “Brixton Riots Railton Road.” 2022. https://www.guidetags.com/mindmaps/explore//3049-brixton-riots-railton-road.

King, Jordan . 2022. “‘Not Welcome in My Own Neighbourhood’: How Gentrification Is Segregating Brixton.” Metro. October 30, 2022. https://metro.co.uk/2022/10/30/not-welcome-in-my-own-area-how-gentrification-is-segregating-brixton-17587009/.

Categories
Correspondents Desks

Violent Care: Indigenous Children in Australia’s Social Work Systems

By Abby Winterich-Knox, Safa Tonuzi, Chrissy Stamey, and Lucien Noël

Introduction

In the aftermath of colonialism, aboriginal communities in Australia have engaged in conflict with the Australian government on a multitude of battlegrounds, including the lives and safety of indigenous children. State control over indigenous communities has extended into the interpersonal relationships between family and child, manifesting in coercive social work policies that extract and displace indigenous children from their homes. Nationwide efforts to cease this systemic displacement have been working tirelessly to bring indigenous children back home, yet these programs’ hegemonic legacies continue to reverberate in contemporary aboriginal lives.

Indigenous History and the Stolen Generation

While there are similarities between the plight and lives of Indigenous people in Australia to those in North America, it is important to familiarize ourselves with the uniqueness of the Australian indigenous community. It is necessary to not conflate the Australian experience with the Indigenous experiences we already know, as they are each uniquely and differently situated. The Australian Indigenous populations are known as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; this encompasses hundreds of groups, all with different languages and histories (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2021). Australia was colonized by Britain in 1788, negatively impacting the Indigenous populations immediately: epidemic disease was spread and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders were forcibly moved to ‘reserves.’ The Indigenous population went from an estimated 320,000 at the time of colonization to 80,000 by the 1930s (2021).

Part of this decline is due to what is known as the Stolen Generation. From the early 1900s into the 1970s, discriminatory policies were aimed at forcing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to abandon their culture, language, and histories (Haebich, 2011). This went as far as governments and churches forcing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their homes. These children became known as the Stolen Generation. (Australia Together). This was a part of the government’s assimilation policy, which was based on the principle that their lives “would be improved if they became part of white society” (Australia Together). The survivors of the Stolen Generation are associated with higher rates of depression, PTSD, suicide, and worse health and economic outcomes than both other Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Australians (Australia Together). While the Australian government is not taking Indigenous children from their homes anymore, there is still a pushing of Indigenous erasure from Australian history and culture, which is necessary to confront (Haebich, 2011).

Over-representation of Indigenous Children in Australia’s Welfare System

Only 5% of Australia’s young demographic consists of indigenous children, yet indigenous children make up 42% of the children placed in out-of-home care (Bridges, 2023).

The overwhelming numbers of indigenous children enrolled in the Australian welfare system directly results from deliberate efforts made by the Australian state to assimilate and strip indigenous people from their authentic culture. Up until the 1960s, indigenous people of Australia faced segregation, removal from family, and placement into schools that served the purpose of assimilating the next generations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait peoples. This generation of indigenous people have been referred to as the “stolen generation” (Tilbury, 2008). Although explicit oppression ended in the 1960s, the over-representation of indigenous children in the Australian welfare system demonstrates the lasting effects

In a study conducted in 2008, Clare Tilbury found that indigenous children were three times more likely than  to be notified or reported to child protection authorities compared to their non-indigenous counterparts. The source of over-representation stems from the nature of the intervention used by Australian authorities’ hegemonic efforts.  Even more findings revealed that indigenous children were found to be victims of abuse and neglect by their own family members.

Although the Child Placement Principle aims to place the children in homes of their extended family, there is no guarantee and the regulation does not strictly adhere to guidelines, and often the principle is not even followed. Instead of choosing to invest in indigenous communities, the government permeates the vilified approach of indigenous communities. In these communities, Australian constitutional powers have withheld security payments from parents, increased policing and deployed arm services, prohibited the ownership and purchasing of alcohol, and controlled governance in certain areas.

Much like the United States and how marginalized communities are treated, abuse and neglect become a cyclical process. Building off this cyclical process, we can think about the master-slave dialectic and apply it to what is happening in Australian indigenous communities. The Australian government indoctrinated the “stolen generation” into believing that they were uncivil and violent humans, and therefore, certain indigenous people have this false sense of association with violence amongst as a part of their culture–almost as if it is the norm. This generational trauma has manifested as unstable home life that creates this over-representation of indigenous children in Australia’s welfare system.

Care Theory and (Post)Colonial Social Work

Aboriginal children’s systemic rehousing operates within a framework of state-organized care as a mode of colonial violence. Scholars of care generally conduct their work within the medical and public health fields, yet the lenses used to interpret care policy can transfer onto the experiences of those oppressed within postcolonial structures, like the Australian child welfare system. When removed from their family and community, aboriginal children are severed from their care systems under a form of colonialism often referred to as maternal colonialism. This concept depends upon a maternalistic, hegemonic ideology to “invade into the most intimate spaces and relationships of indigenous people’s lives” (Jacobs, 2005). Colonial social work policy breaks apart the “unsafe” indigenous family for the “good” of the indigenous child, which reflects an ideology rooted in the refusal to recognize the indigenous family’s structure or history as a legitimate form of being (“Bringing them Home,” 1997).

Similar studies of failed social work projects in indigenous communities find a refusal from the state to meet indigenous communities where they are, and instead continually coerce these communities towards a developmental standard the government holds (Stevenson, 2014). The expectation of progress–and refusal to recognize the nature of postcolonial indigenous existence–inherently severs the ability for care to occur. The consequence is state intervention without comprehension, and a dissonance between indigenous and white Australia exacerbated by the generational trauma of forced removals.

Indigenous Children in Out of Home Care: Implications of the Stolen Generations

A recursive analysis of Australian Indigenous children’s over-representation in out of home care and juvenile detention centers indicates that the implications of the Stolen Generations remain ever-present in the lived realities of their families and their communities. The rate at which Indigenous children are being removed from their families by child protection agencies has in fact increased to higher than any time during the last century. A Report from the Productivity Commission shows that in June 1997 there were 2,785 Indigenous children in out of home care (Gibson, 2013). By June 2020, 18,900 Indigenous children were recorded, 11 times the rate for non-Indigenous children (Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2020). Furthermore, according to a repeat offender “blacklist” acquired by the Guardian (Smee, 2023), more than 95% of the children actively being monitored by police and youth justice authorities in north Queensland are Indigenous, indicating a lack of federal incentive to decrease the rates at which Indigenous children are removed from their families.

  Whilst many of these children grow up in fractured communities that expose them to child abuse, domestic and family violence, and alcoholism, dominant colonially-embedded narratives frame Indigenous peoples as perpetrators of their own poverty, violence, and trauma. As such, many federal policies and state interventions continue to replicate colonial dynamics whilst exacerbating the conditions of child abuse and domestic violence they aim at addressing (Funston et al., 2016, p.57). These policies often fail to consider the racialised nature of intergenerational trauma prevalent within Indigenous communities and the colonial origins of the poverty, family violence, and despair that continues to implicate such trauma. Instead, policies are often focused on increasing restrictions and the policing of Indigenous communities (Smee, 2023). 

Conclusion

Embracing the ongoing recursion of history assists in understanding historical experiences such as the Stolen Generations as moments not isolated in time with clear beginnings and ends, but culminations of moments that continually affect the lived realities and conditions of people in the present. Although these understandings should inform a different focus in child protection grounded in ongoing consultations with Indigenous communities and increasing community resources, Indigenous children continue to be removed and placed within out of home care, often leading to early entry into the juvenile youth system which exposes them to greater risks of physical, sexual, and emotional harm (Funston et al., 2016, p.52, 56). Such implications not only perpetuate but deepen the open wound that is the intergenerational trauma of the Stolen Generations whilst making it increasingly difficult for Indigenous children to make meaningful connections with their Indigenous cultural heritage and its unique ways of doing, being, and knowing. 

Bibliography

Australian Human Rights Commission (1997). Bringing them home: the ‘stolen children’ report.

Retrieved April 2, 2023, from

https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-social-justice/publications/bringing-them-home.

Australian Institute of Family Studies (2020) Child protection and aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children. Retrieved April 1, 2023, from https://aifs.gov.au/resources/policy-and-practice-papers/child-protection-and-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander#:~:text=At%2030%20June%202018%2C%2017%2C787,children%2C%20at%205.2%20per%201%2C000.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2021). Profile of Indigenous Australians. Retrieved

from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/profile-of-indigenous-australians

Alicia, B. (2023, April 1). Life Without Barriers will transfer responsibility of fostered Aboriginal children to Indigenous-led services. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-04-02/indigenous-led-foster-care-transfer-life-without-barriers/102164134

Funston, L., Herring, S., & ACMAG. (2016). When Will the Stolen Generations End? A Qualitative Critical Exploration of Contemporary ‘Child Protection’ Practices in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities. Sexual Abuse in Australia and New Zealand, 7(1), 51-58. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2022.2155129

Gibson, P. (2013, June 11). We have to stop the creation of another stolen generation. Retrieved April 1, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/stolen-generation-aboriginal-children

Haebich, A. (2011). Forgetting Indigenous histories: Cases from the history of Australia’s stolen

generations. Journal of Social History, 44(4), 1033-1046.

Jacobs, M. D. (2005). Maternal Colonialism: White Women and Indigenous Child Removal in

the American West and Australia, 1880-1940. The Western Historical Quarterly, 36(4), 453–476. https://doi.org/10.2307/25443236

Smee, B. (2023, March 17). More than 95% of North Queensland children on Internal Police ‘blacklist’ are Indigenous. Retrieved April 2, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/18/more-than-95-of-north-queensland-children-on-internal-police-blacklist-are-indigenous

Stevenson, L. (2014). Life beside itself: Imagining care in the Canadian Arctic. University of

California Press.

The stolen generation. Australians Together. (n.d.).

https://australianstogether.org.au/discover-and-learn/our-history/stolen-generations/

Tilbury, C. (2008). The over-representation of indigenous children in the Australian child welfare system. INTERNATIONAL J O U R N A L O F SOCIAL WELFARE, 18, 57–64.