TALKING POINTS
A noble tradition?
Headlines about the ways in which the UK aids refugees prompted Twitter users to consider the nation’s historical attitudes towards the issue. Anna Whitelock took stock of the debate
Following recent news stories about British policies towards refugees and asylum seekers, Twitter users reflected on the history of Britain’s relationship with those in need. Journalist Jonathan Freedland (@Freedland) kicked off the debate, noting that “People keep saying that Britain has a ‘noble tradition’ of taking in refugees, citing the [pre-Second World War] Kindertransport as proof… But here’s the problem… To quote the late, much-missed [historian] David Cesarani, Britain ‘was prepared to allow refuge for children, but not for adults who might enter the labour market’.”
Understandably, Freedland’s comments prompted much discussion. Alex Sufit (@AlexSufit) noted that “many of the adults who made it to our shores, Jews and others escaping persecution, were interned as ‘enemy aliens’ – alongside Nazis and Nazi sympathisers. Some were shipped as far as Australia to [internment] camps. Britain has, at best, a chequered past in this regard.”
Julia Kirchhausen (@jkhausen), meanwhile, offered a personal perspective: “That may be true, but my father was one of the Kinder Britain took in [during the war] and he was forever grateful. Maybe people did what they could in the fringes to try to help in whatever way they could. Is that so wrong?”
“The immigration pendulum here in the United Kingdom has always moved in wide arcs”
Yet Denise Fluskey (@DeniseFluskey) offered another story with a very different message: “Both my parents survived the Holocaust, [so] I know the after-effects of trauma that ripple through the whole family. The Kindertransport saved lives, but also gave death sentences to the parents and bequeathed traumatic survivor guilt to those children.”
Some commentators were eager to point out that other examples were perhaps more illustrative. David Robinson (@scotsmandavid) argued that “a better one is the quarter of a million Belgians [whom Britain took in as refugees from] 1914”. The author and British Army major Levison Wood (@Levisonwood) looked even further back, pointing to the “50,000 Huguenots [who] settled in Britain after persecution in France [from the 16th century]. It’s a fairly noble tradition.”
Finally, Jeff Kaye (@Jakdaw09) aimed to find some common ground. “[It’s] important we do not get carried away with the nonsensical notion that Britain has always welcomed refugees,” he suggested. “The immigration pendulum here has always moved in wide arcs. The Aliens Act of 1905 [which implemented some of the UK’s first controls on immigration] is another example. [The UK has] two traditions on refugees – one noble, one not so much.”
Join the debate at twitter.com/historyextra
Anna Whitelock is professor of history at City, University of London