Respect For Difference

ON RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE
AN ESSAY

‘Socrates had refused to compromise his personal integrity. Plato, with
all his uncompromising canvass-cleaning, was led along a path on
which he compromised his integrity with every step he took. He was
forced to combat free thought, and the pursuit of truth. He was led to
defend lying, political miracles, tabooistic superstition, the suppression
of truth, and ultimately brutal violence. In spite of Socrates’ warning
against misanthropy and misology, he was led to distrust man and to
fear argument. In spite of his own hatred of tyranny, he was led to look
to a tyrant for help, and to defend the most tyrannical measures. .. He
did not succeed in arresting social change. .. Instead, he succeeded in
binding himself, by his own spell, to powers which once he had hated.’
(Karl Popper: The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume One:
The Spell of Plato (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 2010)

‘What is common to us is our difference.’ (Ron Ramdin, Notes on
Reimaging Britain, Pluto Press, London, 1999)

This original Essay is based on experience, observation and ideas
contained in my writings.
Even though it was obvious, the small Trinidad village in which
oI tghreerwruurpalwcaosmumnurenmitaierks awbliethfionr tthweo‘Smugaianr Breealsto,’ntsh: ifsirpstl,acuenwlikaes
not typical in that it stood at the margin of modernity near
aforbmuerdgeaonminicgroicnodsmustorifalthteowwind;eranpodpusleactoionndlyo,f Titrsiniidnahdabwithaincths
was then one of the most cosmopolitan areas in the world.
famWilyithwians tlhoecastoedciaalt atnhde leocwoenromenidc.strAuncdtuwrehoilfe tohne tvhiellaEgaes,temrny
side of our small house the residents were African-Trinidadians,
othnestehesiodtehsewr esride eC, hwreirsetiaInnsd,iaMns,usalimdesvaonudt Ha vinadriuetfyamofiloyt.heBresy. oOndf
all the lessons inculcated in me by my parents, whenever I had been
involved or had been witness to quarrels between local people on

-1-

RON RAMDIN

the grounds of Otherness (on ‘race,’ tribe, caste, class, colour,
AgeLnLde‘Gr, ocudl’stucrheiladnrdenre,’ligaiorenc,ufrorrinegx,amevpelne)coImtofookrtihnegedthtohuatghwte. wBeuret
in spite of the goodness of Christian or other religious teachings
annodt, pcorimncmipulnesa,l frqoumarrbeolsyahnododfigthotsteceonnatgienhuoeoddt,o pmroolriefeoraftteen. than

Later I learned about Imperialism and Colonisation from which
Europeans’ perception and attitudes towards Africans and Asians
led to African chattel Slavery and Indian indentureship (wage
slavery) on the plantations of the New World. Eventually, both
systems of labour control, were abolished; Indian indentureship
just twenty-five years before I was born.

In spite of the camaraderie arising from the ‘brotherhood’
and ‘sisterhood’ of having been in bondage, the difference in
backgrounds between the neighbours on either side of our house
was clear enough, but of little or no concern to me then. With
time, as I came to know that my father’s Hindu name was ‘Hardeo’
I also got used to his contemporaries calling him ‘Bing,’ nick-
named after the popular American Crooner Bing Crosby. While
the external difference between the imitator and the imitated
was clear, my father’s participation in ‘Western’ culture marked a
cultural shift away from the older generation of Indians who had
kept alive Hindu-Muslim traditions, especially Indian languages,
one of which was Hindi. Of the less spoken Urdu and Bhojpuri,
I understood nothing. I also heard new words: Chamars, Coolie,
Madinga and Madrasee; often in anger, venting raw inner
feelings; and ever since I could remember, like a sound-track in the
background, there was the often incomprehensible older Indians’
bilingual conversations (in particular their ‘broken English’
pronunciations) which I, as a child, laughed at as being odd, ‘funny
sounding’ and old-fashioned. English of the highest quality, both
written and spoken, was what all who vied for ‘education’ and
‘betterment’ aspired to. Broadly speaking, few black or Indian
men and women in the tightly-structured race, class, colour-based)
society of Colonial Trinidad, achieved this. Why? Simply because
the potential achievers were largely drawn from the well-to-do
Classes who lived mainly in the towns of Port of Spain and San
Fernando.

Nana, my maternal Grandfather, knew why he’d left India, but

-2-

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

perhaps he didn’t know (or cared to know) why he’d been living for
so long on the breadline, at the margins of society. Even as late as the
early 1950s, thirty-three years after the abolition of indentureship,
education was not seen by the ruling Elite and Colonial officials
as essential to the Indians’ development. Indeed some thirty years
earlier, sugar planters were adamant that the system of Indenture
was in need of labourers not educated Indians! So decades of
relentless hard labour in all weathers on the cane fields may have
contained the resistant mutterings of Nana and stunted his speech
to such an extent that it was difficult for him to articulate even
the simplest words in the plantation master’s tongue. But this,
I believe, was only partially true. Why? As it was, he was never
given the chance to learn the English language. If his ‘muteness’
had alienated him from English speakers, his estrangement from us
at home and, by extension, from the wider society was accentuated
by the uncompromising expression of his Indianness: notably the
wearing of his dhoti, his ‘strange’ Indians dress, which made him
appear as even more of a stranger on the Sand Road.

Youth that I was I did not think it unkind to regard him as an
‘Outsider.’ Those of us of a younger generation thought he was
out of step with the times. ‘This is Trinidad man, not India!’ we
said to him. Impertinence was the name of the local game for
anyone who either dressed or looked different. Why, as one of
the few survivors of indentureship, should he not be proud of his
Indianness? The local attitude of some Indians and others towards
Nana as an ‘alien’ did not sit well with my boyish view of myself
and all that was being inculcated in me at the Presbyterian School.
Here, Indian pupils not only learned to read and write English,
but were also indoctrinated in the Christian religion, and to being
Creolised which meant wearing Western clothes: trousers and
shirts, not a dhoti. So for all his seeming oddness, more and more,
Nana’s presence took greater hold of me as my responsibilities at
home made me more curious about people outside the family.
For example, of the Indians living on the Sand Road and beyond,
most, if not all, were Trinidad-born; and strangely, regardless of his
disadvantages, I began to think of Nana as a notch above them: he
was authentic. But being ‘India-born’ and living among Creolised
people in the Westernised New World of a Trinidad plantation
village, Nana’s evident marginality was perhaps inevitable; and
the more I tried to understand this, the more he grew in stature

-3-

RON RAMDIN

and importance in my mind. Gradually, as the veil of ignorance
about my grandfather lifted, while appreciating his stoic, powerful
presence (in subsequent years and in varying circumstances) I
learned that for many older, local-born Indians, the practice of
Hinduism, Islam and the general sense of their homeland (their
Indianness) were aspects of their lives that were not well-received
by non-Indians. He was seen as one of a group: indeed, on the
face of it, one could hardly tell the difference between Nana and
many other Indians. Nonetheless, I was aware of his specialness;
and with the passage of time, as his almost forbidding ‘strangeness’
diminished markedly, my empathy and sympathy for him increased
and remained strong for he was the only Indian from India that I
knew, not just in the village, but in all of Trinidad.
During childhood, I remember the occasion when a few children:
two boys and a girl of African descent who, having never seen
or been close to someone like Nana, stared at him: the clothes he
wore, his grey hair and his overall, unfamiliar appearance. From the
road, they entered the yard and moved closer to Nana. Naturally,
the gentle old man was, in his own way, interested in them too.
Suddenly the boy sucked his teeth and blurted out: ‘What dat
coolie man lookin at?’ In turn, the girl added: ‘What kinda funny
dress is dat he wearin?’ She was, of course, well-dressed Western
style, wearing perhaps her best dress and brown leather shoes that
shone. As the children advanced closer to Nana, he regarded
them not with questioning or combative words, but with his usual
friendly smile. Seeing me, the children giggled. As they withdrew
from the yard, I was jolted into thinking as never before about
DIFFERENCE: how different Nana and the children looked!
Stark but true; this was the reality about which there was little that
I or anyone else could do. ‘All ah we is one!’ a local politician of
the time had said. I was much struck by the statement, but at the
time I did not understand why. He was, no doubt echoing a view
commonly held by leaders, the opinion-formers in the community,
but his pronouncement had unsettled me. Why? I had no idea.
Given that the our house was sandwiched between the very different
families (devout Hindus and secular Afro-Trinidadians; a divide
which was then far more marked between such individuals than it
is today) I hasten to add, it was not through these ‘neighbours;’ but
from others that I’d first heard the expressions ‘coolie’ and ‘nigger;’

-4-

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

words uttered in anger, with the inherent threat of violence. Through
such usage and accompanying negative attitudes, I learned a little
more about human differences. One of the clearest indication of
the reality of difference was to be found among the names that
people answered to. While Indian and Indian-sounding names
were often corrupted or re-spelt and recorded in Official ledgers
by British Colonial administrators, many Indians themselves made
name-changes in the hope of gaining some social advantage. On
the other hand, each of the British names like Williams, McDonald,
James, Stewart and Beckford, with which many Afro-Trinidadians
identified, carried its own oppressive labour back-story. So given its
racial mix, my neighbourhood (comprising the Sand Road, Union
Park and Marabella) was, in essence, a commingling of many of the
world’s peoples and their descendants who were transplanted there
because of the dictates of Imperial trade and commerce.

Like the process of formal learning (reading, writing and
arithmetic) the social differences in my Elementary School classes
dawned upon me slowly, but very surely. Increasingly, I became
conscious of some children carrying bags which contained what
I assumed were school things; and it was difficult for me not to
see the DIFFERENCE between them and me for I was not only
shoe-less and bag-less with no money to buy sweets and drinks,
but also excluded from a certain protective cliquishness. Trapped
in the lower ranks, I could do little but observe that a few teachers
were clearly more appreciative of the better-off children, whose
parents they knew well. Perhaps these teachers felt more at ease,
less threatened by members of either their own social class or those
in the ‘class’ to which they aspired.
At this confusing, vulnerable time, passing (the College Entrance)
Examinations had a positive, but short-lived effect on me.
Ultimately, it proved to be an invaluable lesson which I learned
well enough so that when my father had eventually raised the
matter of my College Entrance Examination results, I told him
that I’d passed, but I had destroyed my ‘Pass’ notification slip.
Proud man that he was, predictably, he flew into a rage which for
all its dramatic intensity could not obscure the fact that there was
no conceivable way for me to attend College. Education, at this
higher level was, as every one knew, for the chosen few who could
pay for it. And, as I’d been learning each day, if you were a dark-

-5-

RON RAMDIN

skinned Indian boy as I was from near a sugar plantation, your
future was very dim indeed.

Although, at times, my father read the Holy Bible, he did not
profess to be bookish. Far from it! In fact, he was not academically
ambitious and was fond of saying: ‘A little knowledge is a dangerous
thing.’ Later, when I’d become a published writer, he began using
the expression: ‘Commonsense before book.’ Nonetheless he was
sufficiently well-versed in the ‘Scriptures’ to argue with one or two
‘experts;’ and more than once I’d heard him say to the knowledgeable
local Priest: ‘Yuh should be thankful for the Devil. He keep yuh in
yuh job.’ As time passed, I realised that my father’s so-called vices:
smoking and drinking, for example, were not the issues that he and
the Priest quarrelled about. Their differences were deeper, relating
to beliefs that were irreconcilable. Against this background of
differences, faced with the twin-problems of being uneducated and
not finding a job in Trinidad, soon after entering my teenage years
(at the age of fourteen) with not a penny and little or no prospect
of earning an income, I decided to emigrate to England.

***
On arrival in London at the age of nineteen, unable to find
employment, I joined the ‘Dole’ Unemployment queue. For
three months, I lived on £1 disposable income each week, which
kept me at starvation level before I was gainfully employed. By
my third year on the job at the University of London Library,
through study of the English language, I became a committed
reader of novels; and by extension, I began to develop a sense of
myself and thus a perspective on ‘British History’ which hitherto,
was more or less dominated by stories of Empire, featuring Kings
and Queens of England – the stuff of the Elementary School
texts of my childhood. After leaving the University to work as a
Library Assistant in the British Museum, as I read further, time
and distance from my birthplace compelled me to ask: Who am I?
Responding to the question, consideration of others was inevitable:
For one thing, very quickly it became clear that ‘English people’
were not an amorphous mass and the tendency among non-white
foreigners to see them all simply as ‘White people’ with the same
attitudes and prejudices, was wrong. In England, especially
London, I came in contact with many British people of Scots,

-6-

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

Irish and Welsh backgrounds; and began to see not the surface
whiteness but real differences in speech, attitude and behaviour
between them. Recognising diversity among the various groups
of ‘British people’ with whom I conversed about the displacement
and exile in the great Metropolis, to fulfill my desire of becoming a
writer, I channelled my own growing sense of alienation (a longing
for ‘HOME’) into a work of fiction in the form of short stories.
Increasingly, writing became the medium through which I could
give the fullest expression to my deepening sense of ‘homelessness’
which was, at times, overwhelming.

Intertwined with my writing, day-to- day, I was drawn to
contentious workplace matters and, consequently to campaigning
for social justice. Then came the dramatic historic moment when I
was elected as the first ‘Black’ Shop Steward in the British Museum,
an event that would change my life profoundly and forever. My
election as a workers’ spokesman, came at a time when non-white
leaders at workplaces in Britain were very few. Indeed, my elevation
to such Leadership in important British institutions was unheard
of. Even more significant was the fact that the vast majority, 90%
of the membership that I represented was white working class,
among whom racist, xenophobic beliefs were, at times, expressed
in no uncertain terms. Overall, I was, however, deeply touched
by their vote of confidence in me, which I respected and fully
embraced. And so year on year, I struggled for better wages and
improved working conditions. But while my ten- year engagement
in this leadership role accrued much practical experience, there was
no financial benefit! I quickly learned invaluable lessons from
my engagement with the proverbial ‘University of hard knocks’
and although my reading and literary ambition had expanded
significantly, the intellectual challenges that I faced demanded a
great deal more reading and further study

In the early 1970s, the British Museum and Bloomsbury
constituted an extraordinary hub of intellectual life; an area where
publishers, academics, novelists, poets and artists were not only
to be seen, but also heard. Radical activists debated the earlier
1968 ‘Student Uprisings’ and the way forward for the ‘Proletariat;’
while workers around the world were encouraged by struggles for
Decolonization. Among radicals, it was hoped that Socialism
would spread rapidly across the ‘Third World.’ In Britain and

-7-

RON RAMDIN

elsewhere in Europe working class movements were on the march;
and in many respects trade unions were among the Vanguard of the
movement for change. Given my role as an Organiser of workers
in the very Round Reading Room in the British Museum where
Karl Marx had worked on his great revolutionary book Das Kapital
(or Capital), though inevitably caught up in some of the heated
debates, I did not join the Labour Party, the ranks if the Socialists,
namely Communists, Trotskyists, members of the International
Marxist Group or the Socialist Workers Party. Neither did
I become too closely allied with the Liberal or Conservative
Parties. Instead, my attention, time and energy were fixed on my
deepening commitment to the pressing task of improving the lot
of poorly-paid workers! As their representative, I took the job
very seriously indeed. In fact nothing that I’d previously done was
more instructive and meaningful. I was well-placed to appreciate
what it really meant to be in the rough-and-tumble of working
class politics. Of necessity I read more, assimilating and appraising
a steady stream of economic, social and political literature and
gained much knowledge about local issues and how they related
to national/international affairs. Thus I was able to reflect upon
my Colonial history and heritage, which brought a clearer
understanding of the historic role that I was playing as an agent of
change in the very heart of the former British Empire. ‘Historic
moment’ was an expression much used among Socialists and Trade
Unionists at the time; and as I experienced and understood it,
history was not ‘bunk’ or something in the past, it had momentum
and real meaning for me on the shop floor in the British Museum
and increasingly nationally and internationally. In all that I’d
been deeply immersed in, my leadership became an integral part
of a palpable movement which an astute Bloomsbury bookshop
manager and Rare Books dealer had called: ‘The Radicalisation of
Bloomsbury.’

***
In spite of the clear direction that my life had taken, unlike my
fellow-Unions colleagues, I remained firmly committed to writing.
After completing my first published book From Chattel Slave
to Wage Earner, I had begun a period of many years of research
and writing on a more ambitious work: The Making of the Black
Working Class in Britain. While engaged in the latter work, I

-8-

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

was powerfully drawn to writing about Paul Robeson. Soon I
realised the magnitude and importance of Robeson’s life and work,
importantly, his dramatic appearances in Shakespeare’s Othello.
Significantly, for the purpose of my book, I realised that in the last
of his three appearances as Othello, Robeson had played opposite
Sam Wanamaker as Iago in the famous 1959 Stratford Upon Avon
production. Since then, Wanamaker had become the Founder
of Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre in London and the juxtaposition
of these two American Shakespearean actors (one black the other
white) gave added value to my need to get Wanamaker’s valuable
close-up views on the aspects of Robeson’s work that interested me.
Thus as my desire to speak with Sam Wanamaker grew, I felt the
need to interview him for the book which I’d titled Paul Robeson:
The Man and His Mission. My immediate problem was: how to
reach Mr Wanamaker?

After many attempts, eventually, through my own efforts, I was
able to speak with Mr Wanamaker. As if it was recorded yesterday,
the themes that I’d raised during my Interview with him about
life, art, racism, fascism, acting and Othello resonates powerfully
today. It is, at once, historical and contemporary, instructive in
many ways for a younger generation who seek answers to questions
about themselves and the world they have inherited. That dramatic
entertainment in the form of Othello should so realistically portray
life not only attests to Shakespeare’s understanding of his art, but
also of the human predicament. At the time of my encounter
with Sam Wanamaker I was mindful of the primacy of difference
and the essential need for mutual respect and empathy embedded
in the interlocking aspects of British cultural diversity. Being
‘mindful’ was, however, one thing, but demonstrating, step by
step, how much I understood about ‘difference’ in relation to social
matters was the real test. The theme of difference, following my
concern over Robeson’s statement: The ‘Oneness of Mankind’
had been emerging for some time as a core issue. Indeed, it had
become a preoccupation that had reached a critical juncture in
my ‘understanding’ and thus my exploration of the ‘Oneness of
Mankind’ idea.
So while I continued to attend to the specific question of racism, I
tested not our so-called commonality as human beings, but what for
me now loomed as the biggest of social questions: Our individual

-9-

RON RAMDIN

differences. In other words, arising from my experience of various
kinds of racism, I tried to confront and develop a position; a view
vis-à-vis racism and other aspects of divisive human behaviour.

I immersed myself in garnering historical knowledge, without
which I would be unable to make progress. As it was, I’d read a
treasure-trove of material, and given the tension between Empire,
colonial labour and migration, I pondered the words of the
‘Preface’ of The Making of the Black Working Class in Britain,
prior to its publication. ‘This book,’ I wrote, ‘is an attempt to
put in historical perspective the Black presence in Britain as it
relates to the development of British capitalism and its control and
exploitation of black labour. The making of the black working class
in twentieth century Britain, has been a long process, reflecting
essential changes in Britain’s labour needs over time, both at home
and abroad. As overseas trade expanded, the discipline and control
of labour (both Black and White) became imperative to Britain’s
economic well-being. To ensure the continued exploitation of
colonial labour, an ideology based on racial differences which bred
an inferior/superior nexus both in interpersonal relations and in
international trade, was constructed to keep Blacks in subjection…’

Mindful that such an ‘ideology’ had its genesis in the minds,
perceptions and attitudes of those who championed Colonisation
and Imperial Rule, I went on to argue in Chapter One that a
significant consequence of the commerce and trade in slaves,
cotton and sugar was that black people began to appear in England
in increasing numbers. And throughout the period of slavery and
thereafter, black labour remained a crucial factor in the development
of the British economy.
Having structured the book in three Parts, I ended it with these
paragraphs:

‘At the outset, as a “Class” black workers were deliberately made:
policies and practices determined their Colonial backgrounds
and created the conditions for their emigration to Britain;’ made
them live and work in decaying inner city environments; made
them accept low pay; made them feel guilty when receiving State
Welfare benefits; and made them the subjects of humiliating public
repatriation debates. Indeed the Black working class have been
socially, economically and politically pushed to ekeing out an

- 10 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

existence (a precious one at that!) on the fringe of British society.
Thus “made,” they have been criticised for being a “Society” apart,
alien. While much political capital has been made from this,
black peoples’ alienation brought deepening impoverishment and
desperation. Wherever and whenever their exploitation had become
unbearable, they fought courageously for redress, particularly in
the workplace. By so doing, they consistently campaigned for
solidarity with White workers, significantly without success! It
was evident, however, that the “Black” British will not suffer
gladly while they wait for a “dispensation” from above to be free
from their “makers”…Their history of struggle against racism
and harassment had evolved from resistance to open rebellion…
Indeed the black working class in Britain have taken the initiative
in the Class struggle. While they may hope for a positive response
from the “labour aristocracy” and the white working class generally,
their autonomous struggle (the direct result of British racism) will
continue as their urgent, insistent demands extend to every aspect
of their essential deprivations.’
After much anticipation, eventually on 6 February 1987 The Making
of the Black Working Class in Britain was formally launched. Hailed
as a ‘landmark book,’ the Reporter from New Life wrote: ‘Last
Friday, at 42 Belgrave Square an unusually cheerful “Diplomatic”
function was held…at the High Commission for Trinidad and
Tobago to launch an impressive new book by Trinidadian Ron
Ramdin, The Making of the Black Working Class in Britain…
High Commissioner Dr Ince stressed that “Black people in Britain
are mature people,” and are sick of being treated as “boys.” Mr
Ramdin’s book should go far to improving the situation with its
long historical perspective on slavery and thereafter racism, showing
how that maturity was painfully achieved.’

The West Indian News also reported on the Event and stated that
‘Reading and digesting nearly 700 pages of information, is not,
readers will readily understand, the work of a moment! It begins
by summarising “Capitalism and Slavery” and from there presses
on to modern day Britain. It could be defined as the definitive
work of Black Industrial relations in Britain and what Mr Ramdin
has done is to take a mass of details and put it in the most readable
form…’

- 11 -

RON RAMDIN

Soon after the Launch the first major Book Reviews appeared:
Caryl Phillips, the Caribbean-born novelist wrote in City Limits:
‘Well written and presented with admirable flair…With almost
every turn of the pages the book breaks new ground.’ The New
Society commented: ‘…this is a pioneering and invaluable work
of scholarship and interpretation.’ The British-based West Indian
News described the book as ‘…a major work of research that is
certain to be thumbed through by scholars of the future.’ The
Inner London Education Authority News declared: ‘This book is
essential reading for anyone interested in the history of Blacks in
Britain. What makes this work standout from the steady stream of
titles in the field is its detailed documentation…and the authority
with which it is written.’

Hitherto, I was painfully aware that research and writings on
Blacks and Asians in Britain were seen as marginal and thus
marginalised, such work was not regarded as worthy of ‘Academic’
study.’ With passion and courage I was determined to add to the
precious few texts that existed; and not just about Africans, but
also about Asians. (Justification for my dual approach was the fact
that Blacks - and others - continued to write mainly about ‘Blacks’
and Asians about ‘Asians’). Thus since the 1960s, as historian and
writer on the Black and Asian presence in Britain, I was described
as a ‘pioneer’ and works relating to these main groups were seen
by a snobbish few as a ‘rant! No wonder some attitudes (largely
based on ignorance) have persisted for in spite of Blacks and Asians
being in Britain since the sixteenth century, leading historians
and mainstream histories rarely, if ever, mentioned their presence.
Surely, I thought, serious academics in Britain and America would
have something to say about the largely unknown subject that was
The Making of the Black Working Class in Britain. Indeed someone
had! Mike Savage’s Book Review appeared in Contemporary
Sociology: ‘The title of this impressive book,’ he wrote, ‘echoes
that of E.P. Thompson’s classic The Making of the English Working
Class. This seems to be no accident: amid the welter of much
interesting detail on the struggles of black workers in Britain,
Ramdin seems to advance a Thompsonian argument. Even before
the arrival of large nduatmedbebrascokftoBltahcek1s 6inththceen1t9u5ry0.s,Tahestsreofnogrebbleaacrks
presence in Britain
had created a distinct ideology by the 1950s notably that of Pan
Africanism, developed under the aegis of Padmore, which was

- 12 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

to provide the new immigrants with a set of beliefs that helped
sustain a growing opposition to racism and Capitalism into the
1970s and 1980s. The book contains many virtues: I particularly
welcome the careful contextualization of the Black presence…this
said, there are some weaknesses…But these are minor points. As
an account of the Black presence in Britain, Ramdin’s work offers
a comprehensive and unusually readable account. If at times we
need greater analytical insight, this is only testimony to Ramdin’s
skill in laying out the basic contours of the Black working class.’

Some months later, another distinguished Critic, Ira Katznelson,
wrote in The American Journal of Sociology: ‘The title of this
book The Making of the Black working Class in Britain reveals
the ambition of the author which is to do no less for the formation
of Britain’s black working class than E.P. Thompson accomplished
in writing the history of The Making of the English Working
Class. Ron Ramdin, a Trinidadian independent Scholar…marries
historical narrative, reportage, case histories, character cameos and
vignettes to present the sweep of the story of the emergence of black
consciousness and organisation from the outset of slavery (which
placed some Blacks in British ports) to the present. The densely
packed 600 pages of text, notes and comprehensive bibliography
attest both to the complexity of the too little known tale Ramdin
presents and the comprehensiveness of his aspiration. His aim is a
political history…accounting for and justifying autonomous black
political activities, resistance and revolt in today’s Britain…

One of the great strengths of the presentation is the joining
of these parts into a panoramic whole that allows the reader to
move across and between the book’s stories, to make comparisons
and to raise questions about relationships between the Black
experience in Britain and such macroscopic shaping forces as
capitalist development, slavery and colonisation and the struggle
for democratisation with the British State.
A second considerable strength of the book is the manner in which
it systematically joins domestic events with their international
context. It is of course impossible to tell the tale of Blacks in Britain
without situating their condition within the British Empire.
And to cap it all, a few months later, just before Christmas, TheTimes
newspaper listed the book among its ‘Pick of the Paperbacks.’ So

- 13 -

RON RAMDIN

where there was nothing, now I’d produced something substantial,
a much-needed educational text for British schools, universities
and the general reading public.

***
Even though I continued to meet an increasing number of
people from a wide cross-section of society, though hugely excited,
occasionally I felt more isolated than ever. Why? Perhaps because
during the Seventies and Eighties, decades of rampant racism, there
were very few persons with whom I was able to share my steadily
accumulating research and writing as I extended the bounds of
knowledge. Given the significance and timeliness of what I was
doing, I paid attention in particular to the question of racism. For
decades I was struck by the casual verbal attacks; the arrogant lack
of mutual respect. Having experienced racism from people of
various groups (and knowing well it was not a clear-cut, black and
white issue) I persisted in testing not our so-called commonality
as human beings, but our difference! I thought and felt I should
develop a position (hopefully a clearer view) vis-à-vis ‘race,’ racism
and other aspects of divisive human behaviour. Why this resolve?
And why now? Essentially because through authorship of three
well-received books: From Chattel Slave to Wage Earner, The
Making of the Black Working Class in Britain, Paul Robeson: The
Man and His Mission and an extended autobiographical essay, I
was now much better informed about Empire, race, labour and
social groupings both in the Caribbean and in Britain. Not only
had I gained greater knowledge, but also more confidence and new
insights.
Around this time, given my deepening sense of alienation at
work and my efforts to ‘belong,’ more often than not, I reflected
on what I thought was the crucial message of my book on Paul
Robeson: His belief in the ‘Oneness of Mankind.’ I too, was
attracted to this philosophy which Robeson first came to know
through his contact as an actor with dramatic plays relating to
the starkness of relations between Black and White people in the
United States of America. Time and place was of the essence
because America was a place of ongoing racial conflict and much
attention was focused there. Nonetheless, I also began to think of
‘race,’ racism and tribalism geographically, and not just in Britain

- 14 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

and America. Indeed after completing the Robeson biography,
knowing well the heated arguments not only about race, but also
about discrimination on the grounds of colour, class, gender,
religion and so on, I was determined to apply ‘DIFFERENCE’ to
a variety of circumstances, both historical and contemporary, and
to society in general. While social tensions rose, especially during
the Seventies and Eighties, as a variety of groups sought definition
and redefinition of their identities; a sort of update as to where they
were located, given the flux of British social relations

***
Given my Indo-Caribbean background, during my twenty-five
year residence in Britain, all too often I was perceived as either a
‘Paki’ or ‘Indian.’ Repeated attempts at correcting this erroneous
perception had little impact. Thus denied my true identity, while
in a communitarian way I had at first found the concept of the
‘Oneness of mankind’ appealing, with the benefit of hard experience
and the passage of time, this idea had become more problematic.
‘Oneness’ and ‘difference’ preoccupied me increasingly. So much
so that it became an all-consuming examination of the pros and
cons of these concepts for long stretches of time. For one thing,
the all-embracing ‘Oneness” was neat, familiar; it felt remarkably
comfortable and comforting, especially as I harked back to
childhood and thereafter, when there was even a temptation to
consider it as the last word! This was indeed the case for many
who had tried to convince me that what really matters is: what is
common to us. Common? Yes, they argued. But with time and
closer examination, I felt this line of argument was not getting to
the essential truth of the reality that confronted me. Faced with a
variety of people and perspectives at this time of heightened social
and political awareness, my preoccupation with difference evolved
with compelling force both in my thoughts and writings!
As if I’d been lulled into deep slumber by the comfortable and
comforting ‘Oneness’ idea, now I was rudely awakened when one
day a fellow-West Indian of mixed African and European descent
who, in his less than convincing imitation of a Trinidadian accent
asked: ‘Where yuh from?’
‘Trinidad,’ I replied.

- 15 -

RON RAMDIN

‘A Trini?’ he asked.
‘Yes,’ I answered.
I’m a real Trini too,’ he said proudly. Then with a sceptical look at
me he said. ‘Yuh look Indian.’
‘Yes, I am Indian,’ I said. ‘But not an Indian from India. I’m from
Trinidad.’
‘Where in Trinidad?’ he challenged.
‘Marabella,’ I said ignoring for the moment the superior tone of his
voice. Though he looked puzzled, when I added: ‘Do you know
Union Park Race Track?’ he responded with the statement: ‘Yuh
from the deep south!’ He spoke as if the island was hundreds of
miles long. ‘I’m from up North. Laventille,’ he declared.

‘Are you?’ I said, hoping it was the end of the matter. Instead,
maintaining his sceptical edge, the man challenged me to draw a
map of Trinidad, which I did. ‘Show me where Port of Spain is,’ he
went on. I did. Then he said: ‘Show me where San Fernando is?’
I didn’t. ‘Show me where San Fernando is?’ he repeated. ‘F… o..!’
I replied. He laughed. I didn’t think his interrogation was funny.

***
As a departure from my published books, I was commissioned
by the publisher Heinemann Books to write The West Indies, a
Children’s Educational book for 11-14 year olds. In spite of the
considerable success of this attractively produced, world class
Textbook, one Trinidadian lecturer felt that only Caribbean-
based Specialists (school teachers) should write and publish such
books about the Caribbean. How stupid and short-sighted,
I thought. But sadly, time and again, I would come up against
this kind of anti-intellectual narrow-mindedness camouflaged
as academic professionalism. By extension, there are those who
think only people of a certain ‘race’ or background should write
their particular histories. Given that New World slavery and the
system of indentureship that followed it, constituted my history
and heritage (as my exploration of ‘difference’ gained clarity with
each day and each book that engaged me) I could not disagree
more with such thinking for surely knowledge should not be based

- 16 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

on, or bounded by, race, class, colour, gender, religion, ‘nation’
or geographical location, but by less totalising, more meaningful
ideas and arguments in furtherance of the Social Good. Thus the
civic and social responsibility of everyone was paramount.
After reading a Review of The West Indies, I thought well of it,
primarily because writing such a book had been a challenge. It was
also revealing in that while researching it, I’d uncovered material
which gave me tantalising clues that led to further investigation
and a better understanding of my roots. Against this background
of developing knowledge about the complex region popularly
known as the Caribbean, I saw more clearly the connectedness
of things: of places, people and cultures in the region. During
this thoroughgoing process I recognised the importance of a
longer and broader study than a ‘Monograph’ on ‘East Indians
in the Caribbean’ which I’d been commissioned to write by the
University of Warwick and the publisher Macmillan. Clearly there
was the need for a comprehensive work that would fill a major gap
in Caribbean historiography, I jotted down the working title of
the book that I planned: ‘Arising From Bondage: A History of the
Indo-Caribbean People.’ Adding such a work to African-oriented
histories of two of the Caribbean’s most distinguished intellectuals,
the historians C.L.R James and Dr Eric Williams would, I thought,
make a major contribution.

My engagement with this research and writing, ever-increasing
knowledge drove me to perform to the limit, as I’d been doing for
years. Day-to-day, I pressed ahead, practising what I preached which
was essentially my particular perspective on respect for difference
and inclusiveness, both at the workplace and in communities.
And time and again, I wondered what motivated certain office
managers’ games and attitudes that were so embarrassingly petty
and painfully disrespectful of their staff.

***
Later, as part of my research for a biography of C.L.R James
(regarded as one of the Caribbean’s foremost Thinkers) I met and
Interviewed the West Indian novelist George Lamming in London.
By so doing, I thought I would know more about the Trinidadian
Marxist. Lamming knew James well; and interestingly over a long
period of time. What he said was quite revealing. After a long

- 17 -

RON RAMDIN

absence in England and the United States of America, James went
back to Trinidad. In Lamming’s opinion, James would have stayed
in the Caribbean (indeed there were attempts by Intellectuals and
artists at University of the West Indies to keep him there) but in
the hot-house that was Trinidad politics at the time, James broke-
off relations with his former pupil Eric Williams; a breach which
became acrimonious. Why? I pressed Lamming. James, he said,
was received in a ‘humiliating way.’ All things considered, there
was little or no hope that the relationship between James and
Williams (Leader of the People’s National Movement and first
Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago) could have survived. The
way the PNM was organised was not the kind of Group that James
could have been party to. For James, the difference between him
and Williams was a ‘personal matter,’ not simply a policy issue.
Lamming was however unhappy with the manner in which James
dealt with ‘race’ in Trinidad. His approach had to do with his
Victorian upbringing, his concept of ‘coming out of Good stock.’
James was a romantic who ‘universalized’ issues. He was essentially
an intellectual who articulated ideas on cricket, politics and novels;
a Thinker looking for connection. He possessed a sympathetic
vision and in Lamming’s opinion, the only Caribbean person
to have had that unique ‘vision!’ James’s mind was influenced
by the imperative of philosophy. Unlike Williams, James had a
philosophical mind; and in this respect, he was a bit of a ‘freak’
more to be found among French Colonials. British Imperialists,
according to Lamming, were not interested in ideas. But being a
Marxist/Trotskyist, James was a devout believer in the importance
of political and social Groups, especially those of a ‘Socialist’
inclination.

***
In 1990 I visited Spain to deliver a Lecture at the university of
Seville entitled Towards 1992: Discovery, Black People in Britain
and Ethnic minorities in Europe. At the time, I felt speaking on
such a theme in another European country was ahead of its time!
On my return to Britain, I recognised the need and thereafter I
gained a clearer perspective of myself and Spain which I had loved
visiting. Meeting people and seeing new places touched and
deepened my thoughts, thus underlining an essential historical
connection made with Spain. The themes of slavery, indentureship

- 18 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

and matters relating to Europe, Africa, Asia and the New World,
hitherto areas of relative darkness, became much clearer, prompting
long-gestated questions: Who am I? A West Indian? An Indian?
A Caribbean person? ‘Melting pot’ and ‘multiculturalism’ were
buzz words at this time; a consequence of the post-war influx of
former British colonials, but now, more and more, the pattern of
immigration changed with the arrival of hundreds of thousands of
migrants from outside the Commonwealth. Amidst this state of
ongoing flux and diversity (after decades, ‘flux’ had indeed become
integral to the reality of my life), I continued to think about the
‘Oneness of Mankind’ and considering my experience in Trinidad,
I reflected on the negative name-calling by members of different
groups who publicly traded nasty insults relating to race, tribe,
colour, class, caste, gender, culture, religion and so on. Admittedly,
prior to the publication of my first published piece of writing in the
British magazine Race Today, I had tended to see all Trinidadians as
one people, as working towards the same goal of nationhood. But
ten years on, in my first book From Chattel Slave to Wage Earner,
clearly my thoughts had moved forward in that this was a work
which reflected my interest in identifying the groups of people
in Trinidad, differently. Five years later, in The Making of the
Black Working Class in Britain my concern with different groups
(and sub-divisions within them) became even more pronounced.
Against this background of intense research and writing, I was still
unsure what the ‘Oneness of mankind ’ really meant. At times,
I was uneasy, even troubled by this all-encompassing vision; and
increasingly I felt it needed to be explained and therefore to be
challenged head on.

Confronted with a generalisation like the ‘Oneness of mankind,’
almost immediately I questioned: How do I unpack that other
totalising expression: the much-talked about ‘commonality’
of beings. Unlike the Robeson biography, The Making of the
Black Working Class in Britain did not compromise the essential
differences between different social groups. Nonetheless, rooted
in my childhood and youth, as my thoughts and observations
of ‘DIFFERENCE’ evolved, while social tensions and social
injustice widened the fractures and scarred societies worldwide, I
reflected on having written and published The West Indies, an
exacting test of writing simply and with clarity for a younger age
group about differences in relation to the histories and cultures

- 19 -

RON RAMDIN

of that cosmopolitan region. The significance of this book about
intra-regional differences is that globally it had informed tens of
thousands of pupils in the primary schools of many countries
where English was taught.

So far my understanding of history was still a relatively dark
area, and having undergone the experience of years of reading and
writing about the big picture diasporically in relation to Africa, now
a new wave of interest and excitement gripped me as I continued
to research the little-known Indian-Caribbean diaspora for my
new book Arising From Bondage. As my ideas about social groups
(importantly relations between the ‘general’ and the ‘particular’
within them) gestated, by 1993, I’d become increasingly concerned
with identity and identification: Who was who or what? How
did I relate to others? And interestingly, my former identity as a
‘West Indian’ had changed at a breath-taking pace when African-
descended people from the West Indies recognised and identified
themselves as ‘Afro-Caribbean.’ Thus by default, I was perceived
as Other; and in turn, identified as ‘Indo-Caribbean.’ With this
shift, my ideas about histories, cultures and identity became
more compelling as immigration characterised by a wider range
of immigrants than hitherto (largely from the European Union,
the Middle East and Africa) entered Britain. Furthermore, as
migrations world-wide led to crossing national boundaries, more
and more, my attention on a better life for all was centred (not
on groups, groupings or ‘universals,’ but on respect for difference,
particularly as individuals. This, I felt, should be the starting
point of co-existence: a more meaningful way of realising fairness
in relation to Human Rights and thus social justice. An inclusive
way forward, especially for the alienated and disaffected, would
offer the best prospect of engendering in each person (or citizen)
a greater and more realistic sense of home and belonging in their
communities.

***
While pursuing my literary work, gradually a clearer pattern
of thought and direction had begun to emerge. In effect, my
wide-ranging interests were concerned not only with European
colonisation, African slavery and Blacks and Asians in Britain,
but also aspects of the relationship between India and Indians in

- 20 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

the diaspora, particularly in the Caribbean. This was all the more
evident when my work on the epic story Arising From Bondage
was, at last, completed. It was a cathartic moment, to say the least.
Soon, my expanded knowledge was in demand by students, most
of whom were engaged in postgraduate research for PhD and MA
degrees. As always, in my relations with students, I was only too
glad to be of help.

By now, I’d carved a niche of sorts as an author of the Black
and Asian experience in both Britain and the Caribbean. As the
number of public appearances, media interviews, and Book Reviews
increased, the consensus among those who were well-informed was
that the scope and depth of my books were unsurpassed. This, in
turn, generated greater demand for my services as a Speaker.

Nat Edwards, whom I’d first met in the British Museum some
years before, had become a Senior Curator at the Open Museum
in Glasgow and on one of his visits to London, we discussed the
possibility of me doing a Lecture at the Kelvingrove Art Gallery
and Museum before, as he put it, ‘you become too famous.’
Eventually a date was set and I flew to Glasgow where I was met by
Mr Edwards who guided me directly to a BBC Studio to do a pre-
Lecture Interview. A few hours later, I arrived at the Kelvingrove
venue. Fully aware that Scotland’s Asian and Black population
was much smaller than England’s, I began my Lecture by saying
that 27 years ago I’d come to England as a young immigrant with
great expectations and it was not long before I realised that there
was a pattern to my life, of which my experience in the workplace,
the community and the wider society, formed an integral part.
Among other things, I said that I’d written several books, including
history, biography, a textbook for schools, short stories and was
presently working on a novel. I stressed that a fundamental theme
in my historical works is the connection between Black and Asian
labour and their relationship with white workers and the British
economy. ‘Such issues following the Brixton and Bristol Riots
of the early 1980s,’ I added, ‘were crucial to an understanding of
some of the problems facing Afro-Asian people in Britain.’ I went
on to consider racial discrimination and the lack of inclusiveness
in society, a theme which would continue to preoccupy me as part
of my exploration of what were to me the essential social ideas
of ‘Respect for Difference’ and the over-arching ‘Home and

- 21 -

RON RAMDIN

Belonging.’

By now, in spite of geographical particularities, I was confident
enough and ready to test these ‘iJduesatsb’ efboyrertehleathinisgtortihce1m50ttho
communities elsewhere in the world.
Anniversary of Indian Arrival Day in Trinidad in 1995, Ithhead15r0eathd
my unprecedented Open Letter to a Close Relative on
Anniversary of the Arrival of East Indians in Trinidad on the local
Heritage Radio. This was a new medium and format, indeed a
bold approach through which I could inform the populace. To
my knowledge, hitherto, no Caribbean writer had ever attempted
such a thing and, as if to underline its importance, my reading
of the ‘Letter’ was also broadcast on the BBC Radio Four as well
as on the British Broadcasting Corporation’s Asian and Caribbean
World Service programmes. It was also published in its entirety in
The Hindu newspaper in India and in the Indo-Caribbean Review
in Canada. Taken together, my message reached millions of BBC
radio listeners and readers. In part, my Letter read:

‘Dear Les,

Your photograph is before me on the table where it has been on
view since it arrived with your letter two days ago and, as I write,
I am reminded of your Great-Grandfather; a former…Indian
indentured labourer of legendary physical strength, independent-
minded and outspoken, whom I vaguely remember. I was but a
child, not much older than about five or six, when he died…

On the eve of your admission to the University, I feel proud of
your achievement. And I congratulate you on your exceptional
letter. It has generated a rare excitement in me, especially in the
manner in which you communicate, expressly your experimental
handling of language: changing, evolving, growing (an audacious
departure from the rigid, oppressive, policing language so neat,
so final, so life-sapping, so prevalent) used to good effect by your
imaginative, inventive and altogether refreshing use of words that
suggest boundless possibilities…I am very pleased with your choice
of English, history and philosophy, a trilogy that will, in time, aid
your understanding of the world you live in. But be mindful also
of the importance of hard experience, a precious asset that tests the
most noble of ideas. More than a decade before you were born,
a feverish zeal had gripped the people of your country, who were

- 22 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

for a while, deeply moved by the Motto: “Together We Aspire,
together We Achieve.” Alas much time has elapsed since then
and the desired togetherness remains largely unachieved. Our
continuing failure to respect racial difference shows how little we
have learned since the Genoese explorer Christopher Columbus
had imposed his standard on these islands, and of other exploiters
who followed with their refinements of oppression, instituting
differences in race, colour and class to subjugate the colonised.

You will, of course, be 18 years old on 30 May 1995, the day
coonmwmheimchortahteingcouthnetry1, 5m0tohreanpnaritviecruslaarryly sections of it will be
of the Arrival of the
first indentured Indians in Trinidad…Such conscious seeking of
knowledge as you engage in, can have beneficial results and will,
I hope guide you in your pursuit of excellence as we approach the
third millennium. All things considered, this is a unique historical
moment for you, proud bearer of an inheritance that spans the
generations of courageous Indians who had crossed the “kala pani”
(dark water). I feel confident that as you grow in Self-knowledge
and come to know and rise above the more obvious man-made
differences, you will reach out for the essential fellowship with your
brothers and sisters who comprise the cultural mosaic that mirror
the marvellous capability of human creativity in this extraordinary
land, for knowing and respecting oneself is the best preparation for
knowing and respecting others. ’

***

The historic juncture of the ‘Anniversary’ provoked greater
awareness. Since my first visit to the great Andalusian city of Seville
five years earlier, I was struck by the uniqueness of Flamenco song
and the mesmeric dance of the Gypsies. Often, while in Spain,
I was perceived as ‘Gitano’ both by Gypsies and non-Gypsies.
As I’d said to my Spanish friends, I was not uncomfortable with
such a reference and even though I realised that many Spaniards
(in Andalusia and elsewhere in Spain) did not take too kindly to
Gypsies and Gypsy culture, nonetheless, it was a matter which
forced me to pause and consider my own experience of identity
and identification: In Trinidad I was a ‘Coolie;’ in Britain, I was
a ‘Paki;’ in Spain, I was a ‘Gitano.’ How extraordinary, I thought,
as more and more, I grappled with my difference from others, and

- 23 -

RON RAMDIN

vice-versa, whoever they happen to be. I was struck by how easy
it was to allow what I’d felt so far about the idea of ‘difference’ to
slip: indeed, it took courage and commitment, but I felt bound
to continue through my Lectures and Talks, to explore this ‘idea’
which I’d felt strongly about for years. So it was that while in
Spain, not only did I feel the need to understand, but also to learn
more about Gypsies and their Flamenco culture. In turn, this
generated the possibility of writing a new book: ‘Isabella’s Legacy:
My Discovery of Spain.’ In the process, discovering Spain was
vital to my own submerged and tangled Self-discovery! As if
to confirm my self-identity, on one of my many visits to Seville,
while sitting outside a café with a friend, we were joined by an
Argentinian artist named ‘Molina’ to whom I was introduced as a
Writer from Britain. Struck by my appearance, Senor Molina took
a sheet of A4 paper from my folder and using my black biro pen, he
drew a portrait of me. How interesting, I thought, that a stranger
should so quickly act in this way. Thereafter, as I pursued research
on ‘Isabella’s Legacy,’ I felt empowered as I absorbed emergent
ideas while interweaving histories, cultures and identities.

***
Following an invitation from the BBC to give the ‘Opening
Address’ at an Inaugural Conference to be held at the conference
Centre in Marylebone, my task was to put in historical perspective
the presence of Blacks and Asians in Britain in relation to the
BBC’s responsibility of serving these communities. How much
did the assembled delegates and broadcasters know about the
burgeoning ethnic ‘communities’ and therefore the wider context
of their jobs? I wondered. My real concern, however, were the
ideas and philosophy that had already been evolving at a pace that
took me to the margins and beyond the confines of such sensitive
and contentious themes as immigration, race, tribe, colour, class,
class, gender, religion and culture. Against this background, as I
worked towards the completion of an earlier project, a book titled
‘Black Britain,’ my thoughts continued to move away from the
‘Oneness of mankind’ towards the idea of difference, in particular,
respect for difference.
After the historic BBC Ethnic Minorities’ initiative, Linda Mitchell,
Community Affairs Editor contacted me: ‘Just a quick note,’ she

- 24 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

wrote, ‘ to thank you for your Lecture at the Conference… Many
people said how interesting they found the historical perspective.
I’m sure they’ll make good use of the reading list.’ This response
was gratifying, because I believed that an informed historical
understanding was vital; a prerequisite to good, indeed more
humane social relations.

In the afterglow of the Conference, I was approached, then a few
weeks later, I was honoured by being selected to give the prestigious
Cardiff-Whitbread Lecture. While writing the Lecture, I sometimes
thought about my distinguished predecessors: including Barry
Unsworth, P.D. James, Michele Roberts and Victoria Glendinning.
Then, prior to the Lecture, early in 1997, I received a call from
a Whitbread Public Relations Administrator requesting that I
attend for Publicity purposes, a Photoshoot with photographer
Zac Macaulay. As it turned out, I was pleasantly surprised to learn
that Zac was related to Zachary Macaulay (Humanitarian and
Friend of William Wilberforce MP and Anti-slavery spokesman)
and his son Thomas Babington Macaulay, both of whom I’d read
a great deal about because for some time, I’d been taking notes
for biographies of both men. Following the ‘Shoot,’ Zac said he
had a Family manuscript which might be of interest to me. I was
invited to his home and took a photocopy of a rare document
titled: ‘MACAULAYS, GRIMWOODS AND OTHERS (For
Private Circulation Only)’ which I read with great interest. The
author of this fifty-four page manuscript was ‘Marcus’ who, among
other things, wrote about his ‘dear Aunt Queenie.’ At this stage, I
paused a while, then continued: ‘Every family should have a fairy
godmother, and Aunt Queenie was the undoubted fairy godmother
of ours. A lovely and loving person with glowing dark Indian eyes,
a dusky complexion and nature I ever knew.’ So far, I had gained
new insights into British Imperial history which added to my
interest in race, colour, class, gender and religion in relation to my
exploration of ‘respect for difference.’ Having explicitly integrated
the concept of difference in ‘Black Britain,’ (my completed attempt
at a first inclusive history of Britain) through Marcus’s eyes, as an
historian, I was especially interested to read about one of England’s
greatest historians, Thomas Babington Macaulay, whose History of
England was, at the time of publication, one of the most famous
books both in England and America. Marcus enlightened me
further:

- 25 -

RON RAMDIN

‘Today people think of Lord Macaulay…as an Essayist or a poet,
or as historian. And indeed he was all of these. But in the days
when he lived (the first half of the 1880s) lots of people wrote essays
and poems and Macaulay’s history written late in life covered little
more than a fragment of time say about 75 years. It is less well-
remembered that Macaulay was, at intervals, as an MP, a Statesman
and a Cabinet Minister and that for some years, he was one of
the five men who governed British India and reshaped the course
of (India’s) history, giving it a common language (English) and a
brand new Code of Criminal Law, which is still largely in force to
this day…’ Here, I paused to consider the salient and powerful fact
that I was a descendant of Indian indentured labourers (‘helots’ of
the Empire who had been transported on British ships from India
to the Caribbean) who now as Historian (an Elected Fellow of
the Royal Historical Society) had earned his professional status in
Britain. I appraised and appreciated Marcus’s ‘Private’ manuscript,
as providing an insider’s valuable historical perspective: ‘Today,
thanks to television,’ Marcus wrote, ‘India is thought of as having
been “The Jewel in the Crown.” If that is right, then Macaulay
in a few short years, helped to make it so.’ And to my surprise,
Marcus added for good measure: ‘ Oddly enough he (Macaulay)
started on this process not from any high-flown motives, but
because he needed money.’ (Emphasis mine) So here it was, the
unadorned truth, I thought. Why the need? Because his father
(Zachary) had fallen on hard times. It was fortunate that his son
was now well-placed to help. Marcus explained: ‘The chance to
do so came by reason of an extraordinary way in which British
India was then governed. That is by a weird sort of dual control
system which had been instituted in 1784. In Macaulay’s time the
East India Company still held sway, now governed by four men
– the Governor General and the Governors of the 3 Presidencies
of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay, all Servants of the Company…
at a salary of £1,500 a year. He thus became in a sense, one of the
“masters” of the Supreme Council of India.’

Thomas Babington Macaulay had undoubtedly made history in
India. Then on his return to England in 1838, he had started to
write his widely-read History of England, a ‘Task’ which Marcus
stated was ‘to occupy him for every spare hour of the remaining
tawt eitn, twyhoennehyeeadrisedofohnis2l8ifteh. He was, in fact, still at his desk, hard
December 1859.’

- 26 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

But how does any man become a prominent historian? Marcus
asked. As I paused to consider the question, I asked myself: How
did I, a descendant of Indian indentured labourers transported
from British India to Colonial Trinidad, become an Historian? Just
posing the question required a leap of imagination. Nonetheless,
my immediate interest was in learning more about Thomas
Babington Macaulay’s place in British history. Pursuing this line
of inquiry, both as writer and now as an increasingly well-known
author of histories, I was thrilled to read further about the insider’s
view as to how Macaulay became an historian: ‘A private income,’
Marcus wrote, ‘ though certainly useful is not enough. And having
a famous father could actually have been a handicap. The fact is that
TBM was born with a sense of history. With an enormous appetite
for facts, he had been an avid reader since the age of three and
has a freakish memory (inherited from his father) which enabled
him to hold in his mind just about everything he read or heard…
his family though of modest origins, found themselves surrounded
by men who were at least in part, giants of their age. At Rothley
Temple, where TBM was born and where his Aunt lived with her
husband, Wilberforce was a frequent visitor. And Wilberforce
was not only the Founder of the ‘Anti-Slavery Movement, he
was also the friend, the close colleague of William Pitt, the man
who had become Prime Minister at the age of 24 and who until
his death in 1806 had seemingly fought almost singlehanded
the battle to keep Napoleon away from the shores of England…
Lord Brougham, a strong ally of the Clapham Common “Saints”
and their Anti-Slavery Movement was a brilliant Parliamentary
Speaker and in 1820 he had, as Attorney General, joined with
Thomas Denman (their Solicitor General) in the famous defence
of Queen Caroline…It was Brougham who gave the young TBM
some useful tips on how to become an effective Orator… (So) …
the young TBM despite his “lack of pedigree,” rubbed shoulders
with some of the most influential men of his day, watched history
being made, and in the case of the famous Reform Bills of 1831
and 1832 took a leading part in making it. By now, he’d become
so accomplished and famous a personality that it was said (and by
an enemy at that) that when TBM spoke on the third and final
Reform Bill in March 1832 “you might have heard a pin drop in
the House.” His sister Margaret commented that the House “was
entranced, almost breathless” and that he had been “Holding the
House of Commons absorbed as the Opera House is by a first rate

- 27 -

RON RAMDIN

singer.” Marcus concluded: ‘It seems as if Brougham’s hints on
oratory may have been useful…’

Given my earlier voluminous background reading of the
Macaulays, I was able to situate certain aspects of Thomas’s life,
especially of certain events and dates. 1838, for example, was the
year when the period of ‘Apprenticeship’ relating to Africans who
were enslaved in the West Indies had ended. It was also the year
when the first ‘Coolie ship’ with indentured Indians had arrived on
the sugar plantations in British Guiana. I marvelled at the journeys
that I had made: physical and intellectual; at routes and roots; and
incredibly at how intertwined were the lives of the Macaulays with
Africa, India, the West Indies and mine. Reading further, I learned
that it was just a year after the end of ‘Apprenticeship,’ in 1839
that Macaulay had set about writing his best known History of
England. As Marcus wrote: ‘it was not truly a history of England
at all. Look inside the flyleaf and you would see the magic subtitle:
“From the Accession of James II.” Only the first of the 7 volumes
deals with England prior to the Accession of James II, and only the
last deals with the arrival and subsequent doings of William and
Mary. If you wanted to be unkind, you could say that Macaulay’s
“History”…covered the period from 1685 to 1697 – a total of 12
years… Now that Macaulay is hardly read…one wonders how he
came to be a “bestseller” at the time. I think the secret may be that
he wrote with prejudice – the prejudice of a convinced Whig – and
without confusing impartiality. He knew who and what he liked
or disliked, and his readers were thus easily able to distinguish the
“goodies” for the “baddies” ... The result was a fame which in the
1850s, outshone that of his literary contemporaries including (hard
as it may be to believe now) Charles Dickens, William Thackeray
and Alfred Tennyson. Another result was an unexpected wealth.
.. I am sure Macaulay enjoyed the fame, but the money did not
turn his head at all – he just found it amusing, invested the capital
and gave away most of the resulting income. I guess that for him
the best moment came at lunch time on 28 August 1857, when a
letter arrived from Lord Palmerston offering him a Peerage.’

So the exalted Historian of England became a Peer and thus
enlightened, once more, my keen historical sense vis-a- vis
‘Barbarism,’ ‘Civilisation’ and ‘Empire,’ in relation to India,
generated a desire to pause again and consider the significance of

- 28 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

another date 1857. This was a dark period of British-Indian history
when the Indian Uprising or ‘Mutiny’ occurred with atrocities
committed on both the British and Indian sides. One escape route
for a few mutinous Sepoys (Indian soldiers) was to make their way
overseas as indentured labourers. At this time, British enterprise
via the East India Company extended far and wide to include the
sugar plantations in British Guiana, owned by British entrepreneur
John Gladstone. Thereafter, as hundreds of thousands of Indians
were transported to the Caribbean, Macaulay’s reputation was
assured. Be that as it may, Marcus concludes his portrait of
TBM thus: “Macaulay must also have been greatly pleased in
the Autumn of 1857, when he was elected High Steward of the
Borough of Cambridge. It was after all, Trinity College Cambridge
which had seen the first full flowering of his talents – and it is nice
that he is still held in remembrance in the Chapel at Trinity as well
as in Westminster Abbey. Zachary would despite all his grouchy
criticism, have been proud of him.’ Taking a positive view, all’s
well that ends well, one could say.

But, I reflected, such a well-connected and illustrious family
as the Macaulays were not mere participants, but actors deeply
immersed in the great Events and ‘Movements’ of their times,
including being closely associated with the East India Company,
the contradictions of banking, as well as the humanitarian and
anti-slavery campaigns and, as a consequence, the post-slavery
world of Indian indentureship in the Caribbean and the British
Empire. And being privy to Marcus’s Manuscript, handed to
me personally in the home of a descendant of Thomas Babington
Macaulay had struck me then, as now, as a most significant and
quite extraordinary coming together.

A week after reading Marcus’s account, I expressed warm and
grateful thanks to Zac, the photographer. Among other things,
I reflected on the year 1857 which stood out powerfully, all the
more so because it was the year that saw the opening of the British
Museum’s Round Reading Room; a studious place which Thomas
Babington Macaulay had often used. Incredibly, 112 years later,
this is where I, a child of Empire, had come to earn my living
each day, and had by then written five published histories. It is
interesting too that while writing these and other books, as if the
ghost of Macaulay was in the Room, I came across many references

- 29 -

RON RAMDIN

to his great nephew, the historian George Macaulay (G.M.)
Trevelyan, who was regarded as one of the last historians in the
‘Whig Tradition.’ Alas, my tradition was far removed from these
Whigs. I was not, as Marcus described Lord Macaulay, ‘born with
a sense of history,’ but as part of British geo-politics, arising from
Macaulay’s various controlling actions in India, I emerged from
a quite different set of circumstances and perspectives that were
integral to both the pre-and post-Empire periods.

Of great significance to me was this: From the moment that Zac
and I had met our mutual respect was evident; and, as time passed
on the morning of the ‘shoot,’ I felt increasingly at ease. Many
photographs were taken that Saturday at the British Museum,
but only one would be selected by the Publicity Department to
publicise the 1997 Cardiff Whitbread Lecture. A few days later,
a copy of the photograph was sent to me. It was taken on the
first floor at the north-eastern end of the Arched Room, where the
spines of various sized rare books on wooden shelves formed an
impressive, colourful backdrop. Zac’s trained eye had led him to
decide on the locations and of the many poses, I remember well
that particular moment when the camera clicked. Eventually,
the outcome and selection was a presentable image; a photograph
emblematic of the art of Zac Macaulay that would forever give
meaning to our respective, respectful back-stories and identify
me with the Cardiff Whitbread Lecture for posterity. And so, with
new knowledge, the connectedness, indeed the interweaving of
histories and cultures revealed a great deal, thus deepening my
sense of identity and further exploration.
SPACE
A few weeks after I’d given the Cardiff- Whitbread Lecture, my
‘Tour Guide’ for the Two-Day Event, Jeremy Badcock, had kindly
sent me a Postcard with an interesting accompanying note: ‘The
twenty four hours encompassing your Lecture and our time in
Cardiff were the highlight of my year and I enjoyed your company.’
And having listened to me speak, as a mark of the seriousness with
which he regarded the message contained in my published Lecture
Homelessness and the Novel, he wrote:

‘Thoughts on the 1997 Cardiff Lecture

- 30 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

The other day I fed my cat, a habit both she had I have come quietly
accustomed to and I observed what I now perceive as recognised
behaviour. She ate her meal then left the dining area and placed
herself on the rug in front of the fireplace. Here she diligently
cleaned her paws and promptly lay before the fire. It occurred to
me that she exhibited this form of behaviour every time I feed her
and I wondered if indeed we are creatures of habit. For when I
considered my own circumstances I began to recognise there was
a distinct pattern in terms of my own activities. I then thought
of how the cat would react if I was to place her in a different
environment. I must admit I had my doubts, but why? Reflecting
on my own life, I considered the consequence of a misdemeanour
some years ago whereby I was legally placed in a culture which was
totally alien to me; a culture which was totally antagonistic to my
presence! There was no escaping the hostility or hatred that fellow
companions expressed. A few years later, I sat and thought of my
experience and came to the conclusion that as human beings we
are all travelling our own journey in whichever shape or form. I
remembered a young man from India once saying to me: “You are
a gift to God. What you become is a gift to God.” At the time
I found it to be a poignant statement and drastically affected my
outlook on life.

In a sense, it really homed in on the point we, as human beings
are all in the same boat! Yet, for whatever reason we, at times,
ostracize ourselves from each other. Possibly the reason for this may
lie in the spatial framework in which we exist. It seems there are
three dimensions to our lives: the past, the present and the future.
Each one integrates with each other enabling us to formulate the
judgements we make. The past seems to have an enormous bearing
on our decisions; the culture in which we are indoctrinated has
immense influence. Yet the future grips us with anxiety. In terms
of the cultural difference that exist within the world, I wonder if
relinquishing the past, nurturing the present and looking forward
to the future might usefully assist us.’

That Homelessness and the Novel should elicit such serious
‘Thoughts’ from a seasoned Literary-oriented intellectual was most
gratifying. Mr Badcock had taken the time to carefully set down
his innermost feelings which were significant because they related
to my own intellectual-philosophical development as I refined and

- 31 -

RON RAMDIN

incorporated different strands of thought into various aspects of
my writings. Given my continuing exploration of ideas relating
to ‘Home and Belonging ’ and cultural difference, Mr Badcock’s
question: ‘In terms of cultural difference that exist within the
world I wonder if relinquishing the past, nurturing the present
and looking forward to the future might usefully assist us?’ seemed
too general and simplistic an approach in dealing with ‘respect for
difference.’

In this post-Cardiff-Whitbread Lecture period, as historian,
biographer, writer and thinker, I felt I’d entered a new phase on my
intellectual odyssey of developing the central ‘ideas’ in my writings
that were becoming clearer and more meaningful.
At this juncture, I’d like to make it very clear that while the focus of
my books was on two particular social groups: ‘Blacks and Asians’
(and migrants generally) at no stage in my writings were white
Britons and other Europeans excluded. While exile, homelessness,
home and belonging are key, indeed inter-connected themes, it is
respect for difference and inclusiveness that have been the hallmark
of my literary endeavours dealing with the lives, identities and
cultures of various groups and individuals.
Taken together, my work thus far, constituted a timely and unique
collection of writings that were both historical and contemporary.
By now, with few exceptions, given that every country in the
‘Global Village’ had its ‘Minorities,’ increasingly people were
becoming ‘Commuter Immigrants,’ the working title of a new
book proposal. By implication, the continuous movement of
people in and out of Britain was, of course, directly related to the
big questions that preoccupied me: Home and Belonging: Where
and What is Home? and Respect for difference.

Recognising that difference is at the heart of nature and all life;
that difference drives evolution and as the catalyst and evolutionary
essence of social life, I continued to push the boundaries, hoping
to gain deeper insights through historical writing. By 1999, I was
editing the penultimate draft of the manuscript of ‘Black Britain,’
which explored difference much further than hitherto. In essence,
this compact book provided something rare: a first in British
historiography: In 402 pages (including Bibliography and Index) I
took a long view – 500 years of the Black and Asian history which,

- 32 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

among other things, dealt with various groups to which race, tribe,
colour, class, gender, religion and culture were germane. Moreover,
pursuing the theme of inclusiveness, my intention was to present a
major text-book about the still surprisingly little understood Black
and Asian presence in Britain in relation to the Scots, the Welsh, the
Irish and the English. A large, ambitious undertaking? Yes. And
to what purpose? Britain had been a ‘melting pot’ for centuries:
2a0‘mthuclteinctuultruy.raCl Bonristiadienr,i’nlgonthgabtesfionrcee post-war Immigration in the
the 1950s, the face of Britain
had changed markedly (and has continued to change) I persisted
in my search to find a different, more appropriate title for the book.
Why? Because given my evolving ideas about social relations and
society, I felt that ‘Black’ in the book’s title ‘Black Britain’ was too
general, a ‘political colour’ that was too totalising for the emerging,
essential idea embedded in the final manuscript that I’d presented
to Pluto Press for publication. So if ‘Black Britain’ was not the
title, what should it be?

Considering the various themes in the book and titles, including
‘Images of Britain’ and ‘Imagining Britain,’ several times I got
close, but was not quite there yet. Then, it came with stunning
clarity: REIMAGING BRITAIN! And so the idea of ‘difference’
that I’d been patiently exploring in my writings, eventually emerged
as the central, recurring theme of the published book Reimaging
Britain: 500 Years of Black and Asian History.

Historically ‘Blacks and Asians’ had formed a major component
of what constituted ‘Minorities’ in Britain; and bearing in mind
the larger context, the book’s opening sentence is: ‘Difference has
always been a feature of Humankind.’ It ends with the words
‘We should celebrate human difference.’ What was of great
significance is that my years of day-to-day practical concerns and
my intense study of groups in societies had led me to relentlessly
unpack the ‘Oneness of Mankind.’ And so while engaged with
Reimaging Britain, difference became integral to my writing; a
new approach that I’ve consistently followed. At this stage in the
evolution and application of the idea of respect for difference, to
avoid confusion and/or misunderstanding, in Reimaging Britain I
was explicit about the ever-changing British population and wrote
that Black and Asian people

- 33 -

RON RAMDIN

‘…like their forebears have struggled for the right to demonstrate
their sense of identity in the heart of the former Empire. Today’s
youth demonstrate a strong sense of belonging: They want to win
for Britain. And when they do, they proudly parade their Union
Jacks. They do not want to be misrepresented like a Norman Tebitt
pastiche. They are engaged in a massive pop culture that its seemingly
everywhere in Britain…The popular contemporary trend now is
“Cool Britannia,” a phenomenon that can be found all over Europe.
British identity is flagged up time and again in the debate over
Europe, as though it is something specific a sameness) common to
everyone! The absurdity of this is emphasized when one considers
that pluralistic Britain is considering whether or not to become
more fully involved with pluralistic Europe. (That was in 1999: Its
even more so in 2015!) In making a decision as to Britain’s future
and the European Community, those in power should not forget
the groundswell of feeling reflective of the “new” Britain of British
youths and Black and Asian people generally. For their part, the
actions they take proclaim that they too are integral to the historical
flux, by inscribing as a corrective to Western versions, their own
histories; participants in the act of cultural renewal, of making and
remaking themselves, of enforcing the crucial connection between
racism and culture, thus giving real meaning to life as lived and
creatively expressed in their own hybridised art forms which defy,
redefine and transform “Englishness” and “Britishness” through
a regenerative and liberating accommodation of multiple British
identities. Thus Blacks and Asians vis-à-vis other groups have been
making positive contributions to the process of reimaging Britain.’

And so after decades of thought, in terms of more meaningful
social relations, important as ‘groups’ were (and are), I began to
see that they needed to be unpacked in a similar way as I had been
doing since I’d written about, and became deeply interested in, the
‘Oneness of Mankind.’ What did this statement really mean? I
questioned. Surely this ‘Oneness’ was too much of an aggregate to
make practical sense to each person of whom it could fairly be said:
one size does not fit all.

A related matter was why, in spite of years of sustained pressure
from Socialists of every kind, did I not become a Marxist or
Trotskyist? Decades later, I began to see more clearly that the
Marxist Tendency to totalise social relations was, and is, indeed

- 34 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

problematic. Why? Because concepts and groupings such as race,
tribe, class, colour, gender, religion and so on, tended to deal with
aggregates, rather than with individuals. Thus more and more,
I began to relate ‘Freedom’ and ‘Human Rights’ as meaningless
expressions if, in essence, they did not apply to the individual. This
was the acid test of any ‘ism’ or social, economic or political theory.
In other words, ‘Freedom’ and ‘Human Rights’ should ultimately
relate to one-to-one relationships based on respect for difference.

I came to see difference and recognition of the individual as
increasingly relevant, especially in today’s burgeoning multicultural
communities. Indeed I better understood that without ‘Respect
for Difference’ in society, all else was that bit more problematic
taking us further away from the essence of what should constitute
the ‘Common Good,’ indeed goodwill and therefore democratic,
more meaningful social relations.

So applying difference in an inclusive way to a work of history,
as set out in Reimaging Britain, marked a clear shift away from
the approach of other British histories and historians. It was with
this clarity of thought that I accepted an invitation to give a Public
Lecture in Murcia, Spain. Unlike the earlier University of Seville
Lecture which was exclusively for students, this was for the general
public; and because of its relative newness, it was no less interesting
or perhaps contentious and controversial in its subject matter. I
felt it was to my credit that, once again, I was in a European country
ready to speak about ‘Multicultural Britain.’

Distance brought confirmatory perspective. On this second
occasion of addressing an audience in Spain on ‘Multicultural
Britain,’ I felt that I’d moved decisively and further along the lonely
intellectual path that I’d been treading. Apart from speaking to
audiences, Reimaging Britain not only reflected my ever-deepening
thoughts which underscored filling an historical gap, it also provided
students and interested readers with ‘new’ information. Put simply,
the book was a bold attempt to bring into being something tangible
where there was little or nothing! I thought it important to state
that while much of what constituted Black and Asian history in
Britain had focused largely on the period from the sixteenth to the
eighteenth century, Reimaging Britain broadened and made more
inclusive the scope and brought the history up to date in the late

- 35 -

RON RAMDIN

20th century. Moreover, I stated: ‘the book takes a new approach
to “British history,” reconfiguring the images of Britain that arise
from relations with its colonial and former Colonial possessions –
a perspective that contextually juxtaposes the Scots, Welsh, Irish
and English (the ‘British’) with Black and Asian peoples whose
histories until recently have more often than not been considered
separately, rather than seen as reflecting the interdependence of
their histories. Blacks, Asians and Whites in Britain have been
influencing each other for centuries and this legacy is reflected in
the hybridised lifestyles of Black and Asian youth. British history
should no longer be written from the point of view of English
nostalgia. Rather it needs to reflect multiculturalism for this has
been Britain’s “identity” for centuries…’

Cultural exchange has been ongoing; indeed just prior to the
1990s, I wrote: ‘no fewer than eight cultures co-existed in the
British Isles and the along-standing presence, history and culture of
Blacks and Asians in Britain accrues a profound and incalculable
contribution to Britain at every stage of its (historical and) modern
history.’ And given that Ethnic Minorities increasingly define
themselves as British and identify and see Britain as their home, the
trend towards reimaging Britain continues. Indeed, the “Frontier”
is there for the crossing as various groups sought to redress the
balance of diversity and disadvantage. In the process of reimaging
Britain, I identified music, drawing, painting and photography, the
dramatic arts and literature through which Black and Asian people
have been making their marks.
The artist Sonia Boyce, for example, who integrates ‘material into
the creation of a pictorial space,’ tells stories which addresses ‘the
black woman’s experience in White society. She is intent on the
re-creation of Self by using her own image not as a mirror, but as
a metaphor, the means through which she emphasizes core issues
relating to the “regeneration of a cultural identity within a racist
society.” She deals with imagery which transcends stereotypes
and, in form and subject matter, encourages broadmindedness by
demonstrating that drawing is (or can be) as expressive a medium
and carry as much potential as painting. Thus the picture plane
was seen ‘as a space to be patterned in every sense of the word, in
order not to imitate the world, but to create it.’

- 36 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

On migration and literature, I cited a number of writers and
their writings in relation to Britain. ‘With the passage of time,
the migrants’ and migrant writers’ experiences were expressed in
many works of fiction and non-fiction such as George Lamming’s
The Emigrants (1954) and The Pleasures of Exile (1960), Andrew
Salkey’s Escape to An Autumn Pavement(1963) and V.S. Naipaul’s
The Mimic Men (1967). In The Emigrants, Lamming addresses
the nature of the migratory experience: ‘The interpretation we
give hist’ry is people the world over always searchin’ and feelin,’
from time immemorial them keep searchin’ and feelin.’ In the
‘post-modern’ world an ever-increasing body of literary texts are
related to migration; indeed ‘Writing Across Worlds’ are among
the major themes being expressed. As citizens not just of one
country, but many, one writer proclaims the ‘boundless Kingdom
of the imagination, the half-lost land of memory.’

Alienation had become an important subject of study for both
Social Scientists and literary scholars, who together can advance
our understanding. Of all the writers who came to London, Sam
Selvon, in his trilogy The Lonely Londoners, Moses Ascending and
Moses Migrating, perhaps evokes best the black migrants’ post-war
attempts to recreate ‘home’ in a ‘City of words.’ The migrants’
entry into Britain confronted Selvon with his own identity. It is
this confrontation which inspired him to use language in his art to
decolonise, both in style and content, the traditional imperialist
novel. His Black Londoners are rootless characters through
whom he uses language to remake the city in their own image.
He used the ‘oral Calypsonian ballad’ to good subversive effect;
a striking departure from the strictures of ‘Queen’s English’ or
‘Standard English.’ Indeed his efforts at literary decolonisation not
only colonises England in reverse, but also looks forward to the
later works of Caribbean poets and writers (such as James Berry,
Michael Smith, Jean Breeze and Linton Johnson) who combined
the literary with the oral.
Professor Michel Fabre of the Sorbonne University has said of
Selvon that he ‘does no assimilate into the mainstream (of writing
Standard English) he explodes it.’
Finally, given the great challenge of producing such a ‘multicultural’
work like Reimaging Britain, I set down the crucial concluding

- 37 -

RON RAMDIN

paragraphs of with my own brand of literary inventiveness as
follows:

‘…whether or not the novel is dead, these writings, creations
by people from the former British Empire, whose British-born
children are, in effect, redressing the balance by writing back in a
new linguistic mixture; a vital and inescapable task at the heart of
the post-Colonial enterprise. Given that post-Colonial literature
is “essentially political,” its creation and study necessitate serious
questioning of the axioms upon which the whole discipline of
English has been founded, for they are not immutable “truths,” but
changeable social and political constructions.
Like Boyce, the writers of post-colonial literature and other Afro-
Asian artists before her who had learned to draw and to paint,
the multitude of Black and Asian youths in the 1990s (who are
among the majority of the “underclass,” the long-term unemployed
with precious little space for manoeuvre) are engaged, through
momentary configuration of images and attitudes in reinventing
themselves within the “Britannic melting pot.” At the end of
the bloodiest century in recorded human history, diversity and
disadvantage have underscored this multifaceted Black, Asian and
“British” history of racialized interdependence which, in turn has
been characterised by Black and Asian peoples’ dignity, courage
and self-belief. But although the “brothers” and “sisters” are
still denied the “upper-hand” they have learned much about the
use of colour! Such an imposition had subjected and consigned
Black and Asian people to the wretchedness and frustration of
being at the margins of a racial divide along economic, social and
political lines. From these unpromising circumstances, in the fast-
changing proliferating multi-coloured, cross-cultural mosaic of
cultural coexistence (reflecting more light and less shadow, subtle
nuances giving perspective to a modernist version of an essentially
primal story) has appeared to contradict certain prevailing norms
and values, the legacy of white mythologies. The post-Empire
counterpoise has been converted into highly-charged creative
“UN-British” lifestyles, new and positive images of their humanity
imprinted on a time-worn canvass; portrayals that are evocative of
the art of living with difference in a society in which elites, contrary
to political realities and incontrovertible evidence of a pervasive
racist culture, still perceive themselves and British institutions not as

- 38 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

striving for, but as providing the ever-elusive “Equal opportunities”
for all. Few would argue against the advances made, but the vision
of cock-eyed power-brokers, architects of the economy and patrons
of the arts continue to inspire in those they mislead, a desire and
urgency to add their individual and collective brush-strokes in
the making of a truer, though less-defined and unfinished picture
of British life and living which insists that the people in these
“Sceptred Isles” far from being the “Lords of humankind,” have
been, and are, of many cultures with a tendency to look outwards
and more realistically at themselves and release the imagination
from the Empire within…’

In my concluding paragraph, I wrote:
‘Clearly, at least from the time of the Viking invasions, among
the peoples of the British Isles, the legacy of British traditions is
integral to what has evolved in today’s multicultural Britain. So
in speaking about contemporary British cultural identity, certain
questions arise: for example, Whose Britain? Whose culture? And
whose identity? We should therefore be concerned with Britain
as a complex society in terms of age, gender, sex and the family,
ethnicity, language, youth, culture, class, politics, the environment
and heritage; a diverse Britain with conflicting groups’ interests.
Not surprisingly, each of these groupings has its own interpretation
of Britain and none can claim to be solely representative because
each is influenced by region, religion, education and profession.
We should therefore speak in the plural, of identities in terms of
British culture, rather than identity. By so doing, in this post-
Empire, devolutionary, pro-Europe period of British history,
British civilization and society in the face of the uncertainties of
a fast-changing world in which the ugliness of racism looms large
– we should not miss the opportunity at the new millennium, not
merely to acknowledge, but also to celebrate the creative potential
of human difference.’
Given my ongoing exploration of the idea of difference in relation
to social groups, I reflected that Reimaging Britain was much
more than just another history! I had thought long and hard as
to how I should end the book which necessarily contained many
groupings, sub-groups, cultures, sub-cultures and identities. And
now past the millennium, I posed the question: Was Reimaging
Britain just about ‘race’ and so on? Was it just about Blacks and

- 39 -

RON RAMDIN

Asians? No, was the simple, but resounding answer. I felt that
my focus and preoccupation was to do with something other than
just the groupings of race, tribe, colour, class, gender, religion so
on. Later, I realised that what lay at the core of social dynamics
was something deeper and more truthful, clearly not the above
categorizations because people (individuals) of the same race,
tribe, class, colour, gender and religion, for example, are not
identical. Indeed group categorizations over-emphasize and tends
to promote the deadening, life-sapping effect of suppressing the
energy and creativity of individual persons through sameness,
the opposite of what concerned me: namely that the heart of the
matter was clearly not the above-named groupings, but the lack of
respect for difference! And once more mindful that it is difference
which drives evolution I came to a clearer understanding and
firmly believed: what is common to us is our difference. Given
that this ‘truth’ (or reality) as I saw it, relates to all that I had been
writing about for almost thirty years, it was a profound revelation.
Indeed it explains why for so long I’d been uneasy and increasingly
concerned about the ‘Oneness of mankind’ which was about
totalisation and aggregation (for example, the Marxist concepts of
‘class’ and ‘society’) which overlooks the essential importance and
value of the individual.
In essence then, Reimaging Britain was (is) about difference. Thus
I coined the phrase: ‘Difference is the DNA of social relations.’ At
last, it seemed the cross-fertilization of my thoughts expressed in
my multi-genred oeuvre thus far as historian, biographer, novelist,
essayist and travel writer began to make sense. And so altogether,
my travels, lectures, research and writing, including work on
Isabella’s Legacy: My Discovery of Spain became significant; a
major period on my journey of self-discovery. Put simply, my
call to ‘celebrate the creative potential of human difference’ was, of
course, contrary to what the Elites have been repeatedly telling me
and others. In fact, prior to and at the millennium, the truth of
Reimaging Britain was no less germane than it is today.
But after this bold advocacy, I was keen to apply the idea of ‘respect
for difference’ elsewhere in the world in the hope of underlining its
validity. If it could not be applied in different contexts, then my
hopes for it, in principle, as a sound, democratic, idea would be
dashed! As it happened, an ambitious study that I’d been working

- 40 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

on was completed and ready for publication. The book titled:
Arising From Bondage: A History of the Indo-Caribbean People
was another first: The most comprehensive book on the East
Indians in the Caribbean.

After the twelve years that had passed spanning conception
to publication, I was thrilled that Arising From bondage was
at last available for all who wished to read it. In my Preface I
wrote: ‘This book is an attempt to fill a major gap in Caribbean
historiography: the first comprehensive narrative which puts into
historical perspective the struggles of the Indo-Caribbean people…
Arising From Bondage is an epic of extraordinary perseverance and
courage of an enterprising people whose contribution to Caribbean
societies had been (and is) enormously important, even though it
has been little understood and much undervalued. It is hoped this
book…will not only help students interested in the rich mosaic of
cultures in the Caribbean, but will also attract general readers and
bring us closer to a more informed view and better understanding
of the people of the Caribbean.’
A rich mosaic of cultures existed, yet hitherto, the Indians’ presence
and contribution in the Caribbean was largely ‘hidden.’ I added:
‘Given that there is an estimated 10 million persons of South Asian
descent living outside Asia…this work will complement existing
and potential studies of Indian populations in other parts of the
world, thus retrieving it from relative obscurity. It needs to be said
that for too long the unrelenting struggle of the Indians have been
seen in certain circles as a footnote to Caribbean studies, a view
which it is hoped this timely book will help to correct. If it is true
that until recently Indians in the Caribbean have been ignored and
therefore “written out” of history, then it would be appropriate to
assert that the time has come to “write them in”….Indo-Caribbean
history and culture must be retrieved from the margins and
placed at the centre as an integral part of discourse on Caribbean
historiography….For the period between Emancipation and the
achievement of Political Independence of various territories in the
Caribbean, there had been no proper, comprehensive, long-view
history of the Caribbean… In so far as Arising From Bondage
tells of essential aspects of the post-Emancipation period, it is
invaluable.’

- 41 -

RON RAMDIN

One major aspect is that, in great detail, it tells the story of
the recruitment, arrival, settlement and development of the Indo-
Caribbean people. Furthermore, and of special significance, in
terms of my own intellectual development and the refinement of
certain ideas, I wrote:

‘Though many Indians are proud of their heritage, with few
exceptions, contemporary Indians are deeply attached to their
New World environment, having continuously adjusted in varying
degrees to changes imposed upon them and to their changing
contexts; and by adopting new concepts, they have helped to
shape the circumstances of their childrens’ lives and in turn, the
succeeding generation have influenced their descendants who
became increasingly integrated in their particular societies…

Diversity, so characteristic of this part of the world, must be
cherished and until the Elites can recognise difference and act in
response to the popular appeal of the masses to bring about social
change through genuine respect for the human rights of others,
the contradictions endemic in Caribbean societies underscored by
domination and control, will continue to be over-emphasized at the
expense of a more integrative approach to future policy-making.
Politicians who so readily exploit human differences of one sort or
another, do so often knowing well the essential similarities that bind
people socially! But whether or not the Elites recognise and respect
difference for what in essence it represents, the Indians’ massive
contributions to their societies are incalculable. And historically
(like the enslaved Africans before them) they have been resilient
in adversity and after more than a century and a half of resistance
and revolt endemic in the process of arising from their bonded
status and its residual prejudices both individually and collectively,
their lives movingly evoke an epic and exemplary story of human
resourcefulness, dignity and self-determination, sustained by a
deep spirituality invoked through imaginative interpretations of
songs, dance, artforms, elaborate rituals and colourful, symbolic
festivals of ancient tradition.

As we approach the end of the century, new identities and
new views are being forged from tensions arising from the
underdeveloped world…, particularly in the Caribbean in response
to new technologies and the possibilities of the richer world that

- 42 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

are likely to test the human spirit in disturbing ways. But, for
some time now, the peoples of this region have been creating a
multi-hued, multi-faceted admixture of enriching cultures. The
history of the Indo-Caribbean people could well surprise us by
yielding some invaluable lessons and some warnings; a legacy and
a compass melding elements of East and West which informs us of
the Indo-Caribbean people and their descendants’ odyssey towards
new horizons.’

Worthy of note, is the fact that to date, the book contains the
most comprehensive Bibliography on the subject. I reflected that
throughout my childhood and over many decades of research and
writing in Britain, I was constantly bombarded by the categorization
of people in terms of race, colour, gender, culture, religion and
so on. For me, these labels or expressions were becoming almost
meaningless in the sense that the person was, more or less,
overwhelmingly subsumed, indeed in some cases, oppressed by
group psychology. And so my challenge against prevailing views
continued, with due intensity.

The Launch of Arising From Bondage, held at the Hilton Hotel
in Port of Spain, Trinidad, was a most extraordinary event. Before
an audience which included the Head of State, what I had to say
was clearly spelt out and strongly presented in my Address: ‘Your
Excellency President Robinson, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ms
Noor Hasanali (wife of Former President Hasanali) Distinguished
Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, for as long as I can remember, I
have been bombarded from every conceivable angle by aspects of
human difference. As a child, and years later, as a young man, my
lack of understanding was compounded by religious leaders and
politicians, the one preaching about the “Oneness of Mankind,”
the other proclaiming from every platform: “All ah we is one!”
In both cases the theme was unity. But therein lay, in my view,
the core problem of human relations vis-à-vis human rights and
freedom. The question of human difference has preoccupied me
increasingly in recent years and, it seems appropriate on returning
to my birthplace for this Launch that I should reflect upon the
genesis and evolution of my book Arising From Bondage.
After speaking for about fifteen minutes, I concluded:

‘At any given time (and this applies to each of us in this room)

- 43 -

RON RAMDIN

we are who we are and always will be… Respect for each other can
only be based upon this understanding. Over-emphasis on the
group, on the society, tends to diminish the individual and should,
because of its oppressiveness be resisted. Understanding this has
been at the core of my voyage of self-discovery. In many ways,
what I’d left in Trinidad had echoes in what I found in Britain;
and 38 years on, I am still deeply concerned with ethnic groups
and “race relations.” Clearly, the Caribbean is a multicultural
region and in speaking about contemporary Caribbean cultural
identity we must consider certain questions: Whose Caribbean?
Whose culture? And whose identity? We should be concerned
with the Caribbean as comprising of complex societies in terms
of age, gender, sex and family, ethnicity, language, youth, culture,
class, politics and heritage; a diverse Caribbean with conflicting
group interests. And not surprisingly each of these Groupings has
its own interpretation of the Caribbean and none can claim to be
solely representative because each of us is influenced by region,
religion education and profession. We should therefore speak
in the plural, not of identity, but of identities. The Caribbean
has been described as a unique field of Good Race Relations and
while there are areas where, from time to time racism rears its ugly
head, with the approach of Indian Arrival Day 2000, as we launch
Arising from Bondage…, we should not miss the opportunity at
the millennium, not merely to acknowledge, but also to celebrate
the creative potential of human difference.’

Thus, in principle, I applied the same social approach contained
in the closing paragraph of Reimaging Britain to the different
Caribbean context. The Book Launch highlighted an amazing
literary Homecoming in that Trinidad’s most respected academics,
politicians, journalists, media people, booksellers and book
enthusiasts paid homage to Arising From Bondage. Of particular
significance was the recognition of difference, particularly respect
for difference that I’d been exploring on my intellectual-literary
odyssey. These concepts were identified by Professor Ramchand
in his perceptive remarks: ‘The titles of Ramdin’s published books
suggests the interests of a modern Caribbean person who has
experienced the meeting of worlds. At the same time they tell of
his gradual discovery that all of we cannot be one, if the one did
not embrace and respect equally and take its changing shape from
all ethnicities that meet in this place.’

- 44 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

Soon after the Launch, a local journalist and a well-known political
commentator published articles in national newspapers which cited
my ‘Address’ and the questions that I’d raised on place, culture and
identity. These ‘articles’ were interesting, not least because once
more, my book’s essential message had direct relevance not only to
the people of Trinidad and Tobago and the Caribbean, but also by
extension, to those living in other countries. Thus Arising From
Bondage was a valuable educational resource.

Following the spectacular millennium celebrations, in 2001
tension and racial strife which enshrouded certain areas of London
and Britain like a dense fog and it seemed right that I should press
on with the promotion and application of difference and mutual
respect, through my books and as a Public Speaker. Over the years,
having spoken in the main to mixed (black and white) audiences,
most of whom were from Ethnic Minority backgrounds in Britain,
now after appearances in Spain, France and the Caribbean, I was
ready to focus more at home by informing ‘mainstream’ British
society.

***

Writing history, so integral to my developing ideas had caught the
attention of a few leading historians and intellectuals in England
and I was presented with a great opportunity. This came from one
of the finest and best publishing institutions in Britain and the
world: The Folio Society of England. I was commissioned to write
an Essay for the book England 1945-2000, the latest publication
in the Society’s multi-volume History of England Series. The
suggested theme was ‘Immigration Since the War’ to which I
added the prefix: ‘The English Test:.’ My engagement with this
important subject made me aware of the weight of responsibility
upon me not only as Historian, but also as a Writer. Moreover, it
was another big chance to test the idea of difference, not only with
the general reading public, but also importantly with my peers who
were among the best, most distinguished historians. As the only
non-white author, there were a few things which I felt needed to be
said in my contribution to this prestigious publication.

As Editor of England 1945-2000 Professor Felipe Fernandez-
Armesto in his Preface wrote: ‘For the Folio History
of England we have sought classic works by historians eminent

- 45 -

RON RAMDIN

in their day and influential since – books still worth reading for
their status as literature or their contribution to historiography.
Where no properly Classic volume is available recent works have
been adopted – well-written, impactful at their first appearance
and likely to endure! All the volumes are intended to represent
important strands in the fabric of English history writing during
the last hundred years. They have been chosen for their diversity of
2m0etthhocedns,tuatrywtiodetlhyeselapsat…ratTedhemtorumthenotfs from the first decades of the
English history if we could
get at it – would consist of a totality of all possible perspectives: by
shifting in and out of different viewpoints, the Folio History will
therefore get closer to the “Truth” than would a conventionally
planned series unified by a very limited set of guidelines and shared
assumptions…

The Series first appeared as the Folio Society celebrated its Fiftieth
year. As it draws to its close, England seems alive or alert with
promise or foreboding. Reading about England’s past is the best
way of preparing for her future…’

The Introduction to England 1945-2000 was written by Lord Roy
Jenkins, then Chancellor of the University of Oxford and former
Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary in the British
Government. He began by saying: ‘Thirty years ago, Sir Keith
Thomas, one of Oxford’s most eminent Historians wrote a famous
book entitled Religion and the Decline of Magic. The period under
review in these essays might appropriately be called Prosperity and
the Decline of Belief. The belief which declined however is not so
much religious faith (although that has diminished too) as faith in
the destiny of the country…”

After a detailed historical analysis of the “country” Lord Jenkins
concluded: ‘The Essays which follow will help to show how
England which emerged from the Second World War got where
it is today. I must confess to having very little idea what will be
revealed by a similar volume another fifty years on.’

My completed Essay ‘The English Test: Immigration Since the
War,’ opened thus:

‘Since Elizabeth I issued her proclamation of 1601 to deport “Such
…blackamoores which…are carried into this realm” because as she

- 46 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

put it, “there are already here to many considerynge how God hath
blessed this land with great increase of people of our owne nation as
anie countrie in the world,” calls for a repatriation of “Foreigners”
from England have echoed down the centuries. But few could
have imagined the changes that would succeed the traumas of the
Second World War; namely that Shakespeare’s “Sceptred Isle” which
had for centuries so masterfully ruled the waves would through an
influx of migrants be transformed from part of a multinational
state into a multiracial, multicultural society. The insistent and
unusual demands of war-time broke down barriers, but others were
erected as large numbers of Colonial people of various nationalities
were uprooted from their homes, having accepted the challenge
of serving King and Country – a chastening and enlightening
experience which led them to consider the prospect of employment
in England.

West Indians, Africans, Indians and Pakistanis, “Colonial
migrants,” came to England in the post-war years at the invitation
of the British Government. Unlike the Poles and Italians (who it
should be said, did suffer some initial prejudice) the non-white
migrants were overwhelmed by discrimination, and often deeply
dispirited and disillusioned by the unpleasant experience of seeking
employment and housing…

Post-war Black and Asian immigration remained a sensitive,
volatile issue on the English political agenda, flashpoints being the
Smethwick Election in 1964, the Kenyan Asian Crisis in 1967 and
the passage of the Commonwealth Immigration Act in 1968 which
represented (as one writer noted) a “major politicisation of racism
in Britain and both Parties had co-operated in its implementation.”
This was the period which also saw the rise to political prominence
of Enoch Powell, spokesman against Black and Asian immigration,
whose inflammatory speeches loom large in English history…

Today, instead of embracing the enriching contribution of
different religions, languages and cultures, many English people felt
threatened believing mistakenly that a pristine Englishness is being
corroded and will eventually be lost. They forget that an English
racial and cultural mix has been evolving for centuries. Nevertheless
politicians, policy-makers and civil servants have, at various times,
tended to demonise the “Foreigner” for his/her difference. Not

- 47 -

RON RAMDIN

surprisingly, colour-prejudice and racial discrimination have been
highly contentious issues in English post-war history and, over the
years, a number of measures have been taken to address them…

Queen Elizabeth II’s England may need to change more than
it has but it has changed enough to recognise the merits of this
challenge. Such writings as “Listen Mr Oxford Don” creations
by people from the former British Empire, are in effect, redressing
the balance by writing back in a new linguistic mixture, a vital
and inescapable task at the heart of the post-Colonial enterprise.
The actions that migrants and their descendants take proclaim
that they too are integral to England’s history by inscribing as a
corrective to Western Versions, their own histories, participants in
an act of social and cultural renewal. So, in the wake of intra-
British, European, African, Middle Eastern, New Commonwealth
and Caribbean post-war immigration, the consequences have been
enormous. And in speaking about contemporary English cultural
identities, certain questions arise: Whose England? Whose culture?
Whose identity?’

Thus the Essay highlighting English plurality, was one more
piece incorporating the main ideas of home and belonging and
respect for difference inherent in my writings. My relief, a sense
of having done my best was palpable. And so reflecting on my
work as historian, biographer , novelist and Essayist, I realised that
I’d joined a distinguished, select list of English writers, including
Thomas Babington Macaulay. But interestingly (given his family’s
Colonial connections with the West Indies, Africa and India)
mindful of my historic role as a descendant of Indian labourers,
ironically, I had also come to write about this ‘Sceptred Isle,’ but
of an England which Macaulay (the former chief ‘Administrator-
Ruler’ of India) could hardly have imagined!

If this was a major break-through for me in gaining access to
the wider British society, as a consequence, another opportunity
beckoned: Following publication, I was called upon to appear as
one of four speakers to promote the book England 1945-2000 at
the prestigious Cheltenham Festival of Literature in 2001. On
arrival at the Everyman Theatre, Sue Bradbury, Editor-in-Chief of
the Folio Society introduced me to the highly-respected Professors
Felipe Fernandez-Armesto and Richard Hoggart, and Peter Jay

- 48 -

RESPECT FOR DIFFERENCE

(former British Ambassador to the United States of America and a
well-known BBC personality), my Co-Debaters on ‘20th Century
Power,’ all of whom I’d heard a great deal about. They’d been at
the top of their game for years and were eminently qualified to
speak to the jam-packed Everyman Theatre audience. Professor
Fernandez-Armesto Chaired the Debate; and after each speaker
had delivered a five-minute Presentation, he began the Debate by
putting the first question to me. When the debate was opened to
the floor, the first question was again directed to me. During the
exchanges, I referred to difference and respect for difference that
were central to most of what I’d been arguing. This was as big a
public engagement as I could have hoped for in that I had to hold
my own before a well-informed cross-section of intellectuals and
the highly literate British public as I presented the ideas that I’d
been exploring in my writings and applying on a daily basis to the
realities of my life. According to the Folio Society’s Editor and the
Organisers of the Cheltenham Literary Festival, the ‘Debate’ and
performances of the Debaters were an unqualified success. Thus
my Essay ‘The English Test: Immigration Since the War’ became
an integral part of English historiography.

***
If in terms of authorial experience, Cheltenham was an eye-opener,
a step up for me, a few months later, there was more to come;
in fact, a great opportunity to air my ideas across Britain and
on the world stage. Michael Blastland, a Producer at the BBC
invited me to participate in a Debate on the highly-rated Radio
Four programme ANALYSIS which, at the time, was presented by
Professor Fernandez- Armesto. The theme of the programme was
‘PATRIOTISM: THE LAST REFUGE.’ The participants in the
Debate were Oliver Letwin (Conservative Shadow Home Secretary
); Brendan O’Leary (Professor of Political Science and Director of
the Art Centre at the University of Pennsylvannia); Professor Lindsay
Paterson (the Institute of Governance at Edinburgh University);
George Shopflin (Jean Monet Professor of Politics at the School
of Eastern and Slavonic Studies, University College, London);
Marianne Talbot (Lecturer in Philosophy at the Department of
Continuing Education, Oxford University) and myself, introduced
as Dr Ron Ramdin, author of Reimaging Britain.

- 49 -

RON RAMDIN

The Debate was broadcast on the BBC nationally, during the first
week in November 2002; and, because of its timeliness in terms of
nation, immigration, difference, home and belonging, I think it
is worth quoting the essential part of it. Opening the programme
Professor Fernandez-Armesto said: ‘Patriotism is a virtue. It
is altruistic: it puts community – the patriot’s state as nation –
above self. Patriotism is generous: patriots make sacrifices for their
country. Patriotism is progressive because citizens who want to
make their country the best strive to make it better. And yet, if
you are patriotic, I think you shouldn’t be. Not that patriotism is a
bad thing: Like maths and dancing, it fills one with wonder, but in
materialist, consumerist, individualist, atomised, kaleidoscopically
mutable society we inhabit, all patriotism seems surprising.
Chauvinists and xenophobia give it a bad name. Abandoned
traditions leave others little to be patriotic about. So how does a
patriotism survive? How does it survive nowadays? Oliver Letwin,
the Shadow Home Secretary, is the son of Jewish immigrants from
Germany. How does he define (his) patriotism?’

Oliver Letwin: ‘I’m like my fellow citizens nurtured by Britain –
the country that gave me freedom under the rule of law and a very
good standard of living and protection from marauders – and so I
have a duty as I see it to support this country against its enemies. ‘

Fernandez-Armesto: ‘So its quid pro quo – its what the country
done for you that makes you patriotic?’
Oliver Letwin: ’ Yes. Exactly.’

In turn Professor O’Leary said: ‘Patriotism, I think is associated
with loyalty to a political community, a state in our contemporary
language and there’s a rationale behind that, namely that loyalty
to the State should be based on some notion of rights and duties
accompanying one another…It is surprising that with the great role
that contemporary states play in the organisation of contemporary
lives that they should be the residual site of some degree of affection
and a national obligation. I think one can write and speak a history
particularly of the working class which would say that its patriotic
attachment to the state has grown in proportion to the Welfare
State and that it’s much more rational and rooted in its self-interest
than it might have been in previous times.’

- 50 -