FGM (female genital mutilation), forced marriage and child sex abuse are criminal acts in the UK. But as they proliferate, the state needs additional investigative and judicial tools to prosecute and convict the perpetrators, even if they are from the migrant community. And – there is a precedent.
Recently, as an Indian guest of a wonderful British-Pakistani friend, I went to a London event where Riz Ahmed and Mohsin Hamid discussed “Migration And Magic”.
Riz Ahmed drew a parallel between America’s
Italian sub -culture and UK’s South Asian sub-culture (both roughly 5% of
population he said). His point was the richness of the works of Copolla and
Scorsese, among othersin their depiction of their Italian-American
community, and the work of Mohsin Hamid among others in their depiction of
their Brit-Asian one.
I got up and asked Riz a long-winded question
(I was scared of being too direct!). “One way for America to mediate the
convergence of the American ‘us’ and the ‘us’ that would brook no other (ie
that part of Italian-American society for whom the ‘us’ was the mafia etc) were
the anti-racketeering laws. What do you think of that possibility as a means
for the UK to mediate the entry of Asians? I’m thinking of forced marriages for
example. And you guys could make fantastic art about that.” His brow briefly
lowered at ‘mafia’ and I felt the fear of one who might face the public censure
of a multicultural DemiGod in London.
The dangers of viewing Migration through the
‘Magical Realism’ of its literary champions
He answered something like: “well the dark
underbelly of societies does make for fascinating stories”. Etcetera.
Days later (I confess) it occurred to me that
what I really wanted to say that day was: “There are many spaces in the UK
today where one sees a crowd bonding over a demonisation of the ‘other’. That
obviously is dangerous. What I see here is a crowd bonding over a canonisation
of the ‘other’. Which is at least as dangerous?”
For the discourse in that crowd was implicitly
and explicitly disparaging of almost any criticism/critics of immigration, or
immigrants/migrants. Especially brown ones (the audience was around 45-55%
Asian as far as I recall.) And even more especially, of the ‘Islamic’ ones.
Questions were raised about racism (almost exclusively white racism, as if it were the only type ever existed: though for example as an Indian I am aware of the monumental dimensions of racism in my country, pre-dating British colonialism); nationalism; and – wanting to ‘go back’ to a purer (‘white’) past: which, as both speakers brilliantly observed, is basically impossible. If there was a reference to slavery it was slavery by whites, as if no other race ever practiced it.
It seemed clear to me that what I was
witnessing was, in part, just another day in a courtroom where the white race
was in the dock (the extent to which that is deserved is a separate issue.)
All this – together with Riz’s excellent
analogy between Italian-Americans and Brit-Asians made me delve deeper into the
Italian-American experience.
Once upon a time, in America – the “Italophobia”
Yes it was a thing, according to John Paul Russo, (of The University of Miami, Florida), and Wikipedia. Though Collins Dictionary lists it only as an example under the ‘Italo-‘ prefix.
Historian Thomas Repetto records that in New York City alone, the number of Italian immigrants and first-generation Italian-Americans soared between 1880 and 1910 to 5,00,000 or one-tenth of the city’s population. The majority of these immigrants ‘were law-abiding, but as with most large groups of people, some were criminals who formed neighborhood gangs, often preying on those in their own communities.’
Many resident Anglo Saxons of America were not
comfortable with all this. The parallels with UK immigrant communities today
are obvious.
‘Italophobia’ was a horrifying reality. It had
a strong racial component: darker south Italians (including Sicilians: Mafia
etc.) were looked upon by the Anglo Saxons as not ‘really’ white people.
According to author Ed Falco , in 1891, ‘After nine Italians were tried and found not guilty of murdering New Orleans Police Chief, … a mob dragged them from the jail, along with two other Italians … and lynched them all … Teddy Roosevelt, not yet president, famously said the lynching was “a rather good thing”. John Parker, who helped organize the lynch mob, later went on to be governor of Louisiana. He said of Italians that they were “just a little worse than the Negro, being if anything filthier in [their] habits, lawless, and treacherous.”’
The other horrifying reality: Cosa Nostra –
‘Our Thing’
Which horror preceeded which, and to what
extent, is of course open to debate.
‘Cosa Nostra’ was the insiders’ name for the Mafia. The Mafia’s American story took off with 1920’s prohibition. As History.com notes: “…Italian-American gangs (along with other ethnic gangs) entered the booming bootleg liquor business and transformed themselves into sophisticated criminal enterprises … During this time, the Sicilian Mafia in Italy, which had flourished since at least the mid-19th century, was under attack from the Fascist regime of Benito Mussolini. Some Sicilian Mafiosi escaped to the United States …. The Mafia in the U.S. and Sicily were separate entities, although the Americans adopted some Italian traditions,
including omerta, an all-important code of conduct and secrecy that forbid any
cooperation with government authorities.”
Then too a certain sub-culture already evolved and operational abroad transplanted its branches to a country taking in immigrants: and adapted to survive and proliferate in local conditions. Bringing with it the good (e.g. Italian food. In UK, Indian food.), and the bad. The recent UK equivalents of the latter include unsavoury practices imported from immigrant countries like child marriage, forced marriage (both rampant in India and generally across the Indian sub-continent) FGM (female genital mutilation) rampant in many African countries and some Muslim communities, and the Islamist practice of treating ‘Kaffir’ females as fair game for sexual slavery/conversion (rampant in Pakistan – even though the existant minorities there are miniscule, and continue to dwindle apace.)
Then
too, a major impediment of discovering and prosecuting crimes was a culture of
silence, mutual self-protection and worst, the imposition of this culture by
threats of violence, torture and death.
Ominously, the repeal of prohibition in 1933 did not eliminate the Mafia. History.com notes “the Mafia moved beyond bootlegging and into a range of underworld activities, from illegal gambling to loan-sharking to prostitution rings … into labor unions and legitimate businesses, including … the New York garment industry, and raked in enormous profits through kickbacks and protection shakedowns. Instrumental to the Mafia’s ever-spreading success was its ability to bribe corrupt public officials and business leaders, along with witnesses and juries in court cases.” Almost certainly its ‘ability to bribe’ (and perhaps more importantly corrupt and coerce) was greatly enhanced by its ability to make threats and take lives of officials who didn’t comply – and their families. This ability stems partly from the peculiar strengths of criminal sub-cultures further expanded upon elsewhere in this article.
Nothing makes clearer than The Mafia chapter
of American history that platitudes about ‘don’t divide the world between us
and them’ are useless – worse than useless – when dealing with a community or
sub-community (which is what the Mafia and its allies constituted) that is
defined by an ‘us’ preying murderously upon a more peaceful ‘them’ (which, as
noted before, included the majority of peaceful Italian-Americans.)
The ‘OUR’ thing of the COSA NOSTRA was
exclusionary, anti-multicultural– and murderously resisted convergence with
any more inclusive, liberal notion of ‘us’.
Racial profiling? Or Cultural profiling?
One of the most dangerous aspects of such an
underworld is the ease with which its self-serving, self-contained,
self-referential shell can remain hidden from its prey—i.e., everyone else.
This was doubtless one reason ‘some government leaders, including FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, voiced skepticism about the existence of a national Italian-American organized crime network and suggested instead that crime gangs operated strictly on a local level. As a result, law enforcement agencies made few inroads in stopping the Mafia’s rise during this period.’ Part of this ignorance of a clear-and-present – and rapidly proliferating – danger, it would be fair to assume, was due to an incapacity to grasp that the law-and-order infrastructure America had evolved thus far was not calibrated to tackle a conspiratorial, self-preserving culture of crime of the scale,
scope and ferocity of the Italian Mafia. There are clear – and by now proven –
parellels here with the retarded recognition of UK’s cultures of crimes (FGM,
forced marriage, child grooming etc.)
As every month reveals (Telford etc) this
recognition is still considerably lagging reality.
By the 1960’s the Mafia was a major player in
American life and crime, and it became clear that the present provisions of law
and police powers were insufficent to stem its proliferation.
RICO: A set of laws based on cultural
profiling. To be exact: ‘culture-of-crime’ profiling
In 1970 the American Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, ‘targeting organized crime and white collar crime … Geared toward ongoing organized criminal activities, the underlying tenet of RICO is to prove and prohibit a pattern of crimes conducted through an “enterprise,” which the statute defines as “any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity.’ (britannica.com)
RICO gave the police and judiciary special
powers to tackle organized crime– perhaps most famously, extra-ordinary
wire-tapping powers. The range of offences it covered included any act or
threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery,
extortion.
Suggestion to the excellent Sajid Javid: A
RICO style ‘POCCA’ to deal with UK cultures-of-crime
I for one hooted and cheered when I heard UK Home Secretary Sajid Javid anounce:“I will not
let cultural or political sensitivities get in the way of understanding … and
doing something about [the scandal of child grooming gangs] … I’ve instructed
my officials to look into this unflinchingly … And where the evidence suggests
that there are certain cultural factors driving this, I will not hesitate to
act. Just as there is damage in insensitive words or actions, these cases have
shown the cost of being over-sensitive … This is how the seeds of destructive
populism are sown.” He went on to add that he would use the Home Secretary’s
powers to strip British citizenship from dual-citizens involved in “gang-based
child sexual exploitation” and other serious crimes. According to him, Brexit
would help in making all this possible (which may or may not be relevant to the
importance of his statement).
Sajid Javid has also made clear he will crack down on FGM and forced marriage: and would tackle the reality that abusers were being handed visas.
But perhaps he – and the government – need
another set of laws for these problems.
This writer
humbly submits that there are important parallels between the COSA
NOSTRA-related sub-cultures within the Italian-American community and the ‘OUR
THING’ type of sub-cultures within the Brit-Asian community around practices
such as FGM, forced marriage, child marriage, child-grooming. That’s why they
should be classified as acts of organized crime (which they are), and targetted
by a set of laws partly modelled on RICO – perhaps a Prevention Of
Culture-of-Crime Act (POCCA), created for UK conditions today.
Ideally, such an act could also be used to
prevent say child abuse by gangs of Christian clergy, immigration on false
pretences through arranged marriages, etc. (In fact there have been arguments
to use RICO against the Catholic Church in America for covering up child abuse,
but none has as yet been successfully brought to bear.)
Some examples of how a POCCA (Prevention Of
Culture-of-Crime Act) might be used:
- Its added police powers could be used to
monitor suspected FGM ‘surgeons’ or ‘clinics’. And pursue cultural units –
families, clans etc … repeatedly practicing the atrocity.
- Similarly with ‘match-makers’ who had a
pattern of conspiring in cases of child marriages or forced marriages.
- RICO ‘proved especially valuable in the pursuit of organized crime networks’ senior leaders who, being far removed from the individual criminal acts perpetrated by low-level members, were previously out of prosecutors’ reach’ (britannica.com). A POCCA modern UK adaptation could similarly pursue ‘religious’ and ‘cultural’ leaders who incite their followers to commit criminal acts.
- Child grooming gangs clearly fall under the category of ‘organized crime’ – in this case, for motives worse than financial.
Did anti-mafia RICO demonise Italians?
This author would argue that, apart from the
special powers of investigation required for breaking up criminal conspiracies
that a POCCA (Prevention Of Culture-of-Crime Act) would provide, it would also
enable a broad attack on sub-cultures-of-crimes that would have the vigour,
purposefulness, and unashamed special law-and-order powers that RICO did.
Because it would be following a precedent
proven to have worked in the free world (or should I say the ‘relatively free
world’ – a description few reasonable people would dispute), it would be easier
for Mr Javid to defend it from the knee-jerk cries of ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘racism’
so prevalent today. It would give him a comprehensible, respectable branding
around which to concentrate resources and minds to take urgently needed, long
overdue action.
And it
would do the opposite of ‘demonising’ Brit-Asians, I would argue. As Sajid
Javid said that the cost of doing nothing is to sow the seeds of destructive
populism. Just as RICO ultimately helped bring the Italian community into the
mainstream by isolating and targetting that subsection of Italian-Americans who
were engaged in criminal sub-cultures, so will a similar approach fecilitate
assimilation of Brit-Asian sub-cultures into a modern, liberal (I use the word
‘liberal’ in the classical sense) society.
Of course many of those who won laurels in
fighting COSA NOSTRA were Italian-Americans themselves. Many of them welcomed
the special protection and powers that made it easier for them to fight this
war against a criminal sub-culture within their minority culture.
Mentioning them brings to mind those splendid Brit-Asians fighting against the contemporary COSA NOSTRA’s in their own communities– people like Nazir Afzal, Gita Sahgal and Maajid Nawaaz – and Sajid Javid. Though the wonderful Sarah Champion, I’m sure they’d all agree, could be made ‘honorary Brit-Asian’ and her name included in this list.
