Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1311619
15 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 22 NOVEMBER 2020 OPINION Religion, race and nationality – how can we overcome our prejudices? WHAT do you think of your neighbours? And what do they think of you? Concerns around increasing division and polari- sation in the UK have persisted stubbornly since the EU ref- erendum in 2016. We hear a lot from academics, politicians and journalists about a suppos- edly fractured nation. But how divided is Britain? Our new re- port – the largest study of at- titudes to diversity in England and Wales – gives some inter- esting insight. The report, published by the Woolf Institute, presented findings from a survey con- ducted by Survation of more than 11,000 adults that asked a series of questions concerning ethnic, national and religious diversity. Has diversity been good for Britain and for your local community? How would you feel if a close relative mar- ried someone from a different ethnic, national or religious background? How diverse are your friends and workplaces? Our statistical analysis re- vealed that religious intoler- ance – such as antisemitism and Islamophobia – is a bigger driver of prejudice than ethnic- ity or nationality. Data from the survey strongly suggests that religion is perhaps one of the last prejudices people are com- fortable expressing openly. And according to our data, religious diversity remains the least popular form of diversity. When asked the question above about marriage, non-Muslim respondents were least com- fortable about a close relative marrying a Muslim person. At- titudes between faith groups al- so tend to be less positive than between ethnic groups. Our findings also revealed that people in work tend to be more positive towards diversity and more likely to have diverse friendship groups than both unemployed and economically inactive people. One big concern is that COV- ID, lockdowns and working from home threaten people's opportunities to encounter others and difference in the workplace. General attitudes But what about general atti- tudes towards diversity among the public? Here the data pro- vided an intriguing puzzle. On the one hand, attitudes to- wards diversity are largely posi- tive. Thinking nationally, a ma- jority within the survey agreed that ethnic diversity is good for British society. More than twice as many agreed than disagreed that migrants are good for British society. In fact, and despite the explosiveness of issues around immigration, migrants appeared more popular than religious diversity. Thinking more locally, nearly two thirds agreed that ethnic diversity is good for the local community and majorities agreed that mi- grants and religious diversity are good for it. That's the good news. On the other hand, 60% agreed that the number of mi- grants in Britain has increased too quickly in the last ten years. Over twice as many agreed than disagreed that ethnic and re- ligious diversity has increased too quickly. In terms of local communities, a majority agreed that increases in the number of migrants have been too quick. Our report describes this as an "emerging national con- sensus". But what type of con- sensus are we talking about? Over a third of those who ex- pressed an opinion and agreed that ethnic diversity is good for Britain also agreed that it has increased too quickly. So, a ma- jority think diversity is a good thing but around a third of that majority think things are mov- ing too quickly. In other words, one large group of people who are positive about diversity is made up of two smaller groups – one positive about change, one less so. Reaching a new consensus For many, this third of peo- ple who think diversity has in- creased too quickly represents a problem. Academics and journalists are far more likely to be highly educated, liberal and mobile ("anywheres" rath- er than "somewheres"). It is unsurprising that opposition to change from those less educat- ed, less liberal and less mobile is seen as problematic. That said, defining negative attitudes to local change – small-c conserv- atism – as forms of hostility or bigotry is unlikely to bring dif- ferent groups back together an- ytime soon. But there may be another way. Perhaps the data are telling us something hopeful about pos- sible routes out of divided and divisive circumstances and away from further polarisation. No one single argument, and especially none around race, ethnicity or immigration, will appeal to everyone. But, as pre- vious reports have suggested, perhaps consensus is achieva- ble. Take anti-racism, it has be- come a powerful force in Brit- ish politics, with mainstream buy-in (footballers taking a knee before games, for exam- ple). This, and our data, sug- gest a public in tune with racial equality. What our data also suggest is that stronger forms of ac- tivism may represent the right approach for some Britons who value diversity, but not all. Issues such as institutional racism could be tackled more effectively by recognising the common ground between peo- ple whose lifestyles and world- views are very different but who share the same basic position – in this case, that diversity is a good thing. This is the common ground on which large-scale societal change can be built, especially around election times. But to start building, we need to loos- en the requirements for ideo- logical purity on these issues. Doing so will help us forge a broader consensus among those who share some, but not all, of our views. Julian Hargreaves Julian Hargreaves is Visiting Fellow, Centre for Islamic Studies University of Cambridge