Main Edition
US
FR
Sunak at the Akshardham Hindu Temple (Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)
Has the Raj returned to roost? After the press captured Rishi Sunak offering a prayer inside New Delhi’s Akshardham temple on Sunday, that was the implication for many. A Hindu man leads Britain; to the north, the First Minister of Scotland, Humza Yousaf, is a Muslim man of Pakistani origin, another scion of British India; to the west in Ireland, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar’s doctor father grew up in coastal Maharashtra, south of Mumbai.
If the early 20th-century racial theorists of white supremacy were still alive, they would be mortified that the “tides of colour” had truly “risen”. One might also expect the Left, if it weren’t for Sunak’s conservatism, to make much of this racial inversion. But scratch below the surface, and the true story here transcends reductive categories of race — if anything, it is a reflection of both premodern and globalised realities of class and caste. Consider Sunak, who once admitted that he did not have working-class friends as a young man, and who, like Varadkar, has a parent who is a physician, placing both of their proximate origins firmly in the professional upper-middle class. Yousaf’s father, meanwhile, was an accountant, perhaps more modest in origins than his peers to the south and east, but nevertheless still solidly middle-class.
Despite today’s focus on race, class and status have always formed the bulwark of India’s elite ideology. As David Cannadine observed in Ornamentalism: How the British Saw Their Empire, this explains Queen Victoria’s repeated habit of adopting and fostering children of African and Asian royals, inculcating them with Christianity. Separated from her white subjects by a chasm of class and origin, this practice was aimed at forming a ruling elite informed by 19th-century Victorian sensibilities of race, but also transcending them, harkening back to an older ideology where the rulers were a fundamentally different species from the peasants and shopkeepers they ruled.
This class element in imperial life is clear even from the perspective of Indians; it was as much a British as an Indian ideology. Mohandas K. Gandhi’s initial activism in South Africa was motivated by his offence, as an upper-caste Indian, at being categorised with black Africans. Gandhi dressed like an Indian holy man later in life, a return to indigeneity, but in South Africa he initially exhibited the sartorial affect of an English-trained barrister. A vegetarian Hindu who had married a woman from his own caste at a young age, Gandhi was still in his early years one of Macaulay’s men: “Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect.”
Two hundred years later, the rise of Sunak and Yousaf illustrates how such class dynamics still hold the British nation in thrall. Both are ethnic Punjabis, but of a variety very distinct from the dominant element in British life, the Mirpuris. The Mirpuris, who hail from Pakistani Kashmir and its environs, form about 70% of the Pakistani population in Britain. These rural villagers eventually went to work in the mills of the English north, and have created their own Pakistani but essentially British working-class culture. Sunak and Yousaf’s family are ethnically related to the Mirpuris, but are more conventional Punjabis from further south: Sunak’s paternal lineage is rooted in modern Pakistani Punjab, as were Yousaf’s ancestors. But more salient than their Punjabi ethnicity is that Sunak and Yousaf both have connections to Africa. The mother and father of Britain’s Prime Minister were born in British Tanganyika and Kenya, respectively. Yousaf’s mother, though ethnically Punjabi, was born and raised in British Kenya.
Subcontinental people of East African provenance have been prominent in British life for decades: in 2011, more than 10% of those of Indian ethnicity in the UK were born in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania (this does not include those born of African Indians in Britain). And Sunak is hardly the only prominent African Indian in Conservative politics. Both the current and former home secretary, Suella Braverman and Priti Patel, have African connections: Braverman’s father being Indian Kenyan and mother Mauritian, while Patel’s family are part of the Ugandan Indian diaspora. The Ugandan Indians, expelled in the Seventies from Idi Amin’s regime with £55 on their person, have re-established themselves as entrepreneurs and professionals in the UK, part of the reason that Indian Britons are a relatively affluent minority.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“Rishi Sunak was born in England, his father in Kenya, and his grandfather in Indian Punjab. But they were always of the world, their opportunities painted upon a canvas without a border.”
Ho hum. But is there any chance he will do the right thing by the Brits and give us back our border?
No.
After reading this, my first reaction is – “Huh?” That’s a lot of words to make no particular point! >
Razib’s point is, he is telling you the story of a community of South Asians who were Globalists before Globalisation was a thing. They were dotted around and prosperous in Africa and around the world – but largely low profile and disregarded. I know this community intimately, because I am of their number. Their primary driver was typically skills around trade and finance, or sellable cognitive skills like management and skills with numbers and memory. These days they do well in STEM as you might expect. What they were poor at (and still are) was taking up the cudgels and manning the fortress against all comers – they would much rather negotiate, or bribe, or barter their way out of such situations. One symptom of this distaste for physicality is for example South Asians are hopeless at football. Or, I don’t notice any Patels in the ranks of the American baseball leagues. Another symptom was being booted around by history – my dad was forced out of Karachi as a teenager, and then forced out of Uganda as an adult with family, both times losing everything. But as the world has become less physical and more cognitive (as MH points out in another article today) their success has steadily grown.
As someone of Gujarati descent, I have often thought South Asians like the Parasis, the Rajasthanis, the Gujaratis, the Hindu Punjabis communities especially, were like a poor man’s version of the European Askanashi Jewish communities. I also observe, in line with the authors article, the distinctness of all these communities dissolving at speed, as part of the 21st century process of turning everyone and everything into the same, homogeneous blob of grey goo.
Very right. A small point- in Bengal, among the Bengali elites and middle classes, football was and is more of a passion, traced back to the Mohun Bagan victory of 1911 over an English club.
Till the 1960s India had a national team dominated by Bengalis, Punjabis, Goans and some South Indians, which won regular Asian tournaments, though never the World Cup.
My prediction for when India will win the world cup is 2736 – and it will be with a team of Indianised robots programmed with the circular head motion which can either be interpreted as yes or no depending on mood.
If the South Asians are so rubbish at football why are they so good at cricket?
Hand to eye coordination, not physical strength.
All to do with diet, curry versus roast beef etc.
Interesting second point. My late Dad would agree with the second point, though I would put it down more to politicised football federations picking the undeserving ones.
I think Prashant ( below)has a good point about ‘contact sports’, The Gurkhas currently in the British Army never seem to feature in the Army Rubgy or Football finals, which tend to be dominated by Infantry ‘thugs’ from Wales or Yorkshire.
Off course traditionally alcohol also played a part until quite recently, it must be said.
I thought Ghurkhas are tough but fairly small people.
So on rugby field they would struggle?
The scrum would be a problem, otherwise speed and agility might be useful.
However I gather they are quite risk averse when it comes to field sports. Why suffer unnecessary injury which may result in unemployment?
Come on Charles, you do usually better than this.
Hand to eye coordination?
So why they are not great in tennis?
Many countries around the world don’t eat overcooked rostbeef.
And they are great at football.
OK, not great but good enough.
Anyone for Korean dog stew?
Well I could have invoked Darwinian genetics,
but that might have caused outrage!
Korean dog stew with noodles? Just the ticket!
It’s the contact sports thing – the brain whirrs away asking what are my chances of getting hurt here against that beefy looking lot over there, instead of recklessly just going for it heedless of the fear. That is not to say there was no spirit of adventure and risk-taking, quite the reverse – that diaspora ended up in Africa by taking big personal and financial risks, including the physical risks associated with going around trading on ships. It’s about the risk/reward calculation. But the love of pushing physical boundaries is not there. There are no Gujaratis at the forefront of extreme sports like skydiving, or even climbing Everest.
Fascinating remarks, but it seems to me that your posts and the article itself are based around a great number of racial/genetic/cultural generalisations whose validity might be open to argument.
What can I say? Guilty as charged.
And yet the title The Iron Man of India is given to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, a Gujarati!
Super interesting! Do you think the comparison between Sunak and Rawaswamy is reasonable?
They’re making wildly different pitches.
The antecedents of US Indian diaspora are rather different from the British Empire Indian diaspora. The Brits took over numbers of Indians to their colonies and although they took some for building infrastructure (because they were practiced at bossing Indians around and found they could get things built more efficiently with Indian labour compared to African labour), most of the Indians who ended up there were from the west of India (Gujrat, Maharashtra, Rajesthan) because of historic Indian Ocean trading from those parts to the Gulf and Africa. As the British opened up Africa for trade more Indians went there to do business – everything from setting up shops (‘dooka’) to taking goods there from around the world, to eventually setting up and running factories, mines, farming, and many were very wealthy even in western terms at that time. For example growing Coffee was a big thing in Uganda – the Indian traders encouraged African farmers to grow this cash crop, and they had set up the infrastructure to transport and process the beans quickly (because you only have a few hours once picked). My dad worked for a wealthy Indian family who owned and managed amongst other things, farms. That coffee network collapsed btw when the Asians were kicked out, and the Africans went back to planting subsistance crops.
In contrast to the Indian diaspora in Africa who were trader types from west India many of them, a lot of the US Indians are the top end of STEM and Management grads from all across India, including large numbers from south India. Having said that, there are now also lots of Gujaratis in the US not from academic backgrounds. The Empire Gujarati traders moved around off their own bat, they were genuine self-starting risk takers, whereas the IIT/IIM type mafia which has built up in the US were essentially picked off because the US can attract the best and brightest from around the world (a brain drain which does the rest of the world no favours at all btw). By the fact of being a small sliver of the very brightest out of a huge country, they were bound to do very well in the US, but they were not natural risk takers. Ramaswamy was born of south Indian parents from this type of background (professionals), so he is second generation, and likely much more Americanised than Sunak is Britishised.
You are a scholar and a gentleman, sir.
How extraordinary then that a bunch of Gujerati traders DIDN’T manage to sail half way around the globe, and end up in the Pool of London in say 1603 with ships full of spices etc?
You are referring to the first ships of the East India Company returning with pepper after Elizabeth granted them license to trade in 1600. Your question is a good one and I can’t guess the answer. They seemed focused on trading in the Gulf and on the Indian Ocean coast of Africa. They also went trading towards Malaysia. But not northwards towards Europe it seems. I can’t imagine their ships were geared to cope with sailing round South Africa and then thousands of miles north all the way to colder climes.
The following may be of interest:
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1800/indian-ocean-trade-before-the-european-conquest/
Thank you!
The Portuguese had a head start by having to cope with the North Atlantic.
We, the idle English were about a hundred years behind!…….typical!
Wow! This post reeks of inferiority complex and is peddling bigotry and eugenics. Also, everything this person states is false.
1) STEM in the US is filled with largely 1st and 2nd generation South Indians, not Rajastanis, Hindu Punjabis, & Gujaratis. Akshata’s parents are South Indian engineers and billionaires.
2) South India is the New Tech and Biotech superpower. Not Rajasthan, Hindu Punjab, Gujarat or Rajasthan.
2) Nobel Winning Scientists are South Indians, not Hindu Punjabis, Gujratis or Rajastanis. And STEM academia and professions are filled with South Indians, Maratis, and Bengalis.
3) Your people have a history of being trounced in military warfare. Newsflash: Military victories require strategy and that needs brains. South Indians were a naval superpower and had their empires established their reach all the way to Sumatra.
4) The only factual information you provided was that your entrepreneurial spirit and brain are inclined towards trickery, treachery, and bribery. It works for an old type of business & mindset, but not the new world of science and technology, which requires brains. Rishi Sunak, after all, is a graduate of Politics and worked in Finance which confuses statistics for real mathematics.
This North Indian bigotry and the confidence that it spews the bigotry given its history is just absurd.
You Gujaratis, Hindu Punjabis and Rajastanis have no history. It was destroyed by invaders whom your ancestors could not stop. That is your legacy don’t appropriate ours.
Not sure the point of this article. Indulgent genetical meander? Bottom line: is Sunak any good? Answer: no. Moreover, a man without a mandate.
.
Sunak is very, very good. Far better than all our other politicians of any stripe. That’s why opponents are scratching round trying to discredit him on the thinnest, most irrelevant of grounds. He’s still very young and will undoubtedly develop after the experience of dealing with the thoroughly poisoned chalice that he was left with.
It’s been a veritable ABC of disruptions: After Boris, Brexit, Covid and war in Ukraine, Sunak faced all sorts of resulting problems, plus the myriad of costs arising from dealing with Covid. There isn’t a mortal – or Civil Servant – who would be able to deal with that lot, all at once.
“they were always of the world, their opportunities painted upon a canvas without a border”….a chilling sentence to sum up our Prime Minister and one unlikely to appeal to an electorate with a roots -based identity .
Now you wouldn’t have said that of another incumbent of Turkish ancestry and born across the pond! The beloved of that root-based obsessive electorate! Go figure that!
Boris truly loved Britain. Sunak doesn’t have any deeper connection to it. After this election he’ll probably move to America.
One Turkish great grandparent does not make him Turkish. You could also claim that he is German for he has German ancestry too…
A good analysis overall. But the success of Sunak and Humza is due to their ability to use their cultural rootedness to political expediency.
Very different from what Macaulay tried to do in 1835 in colonial India, and which I tried to explain in ” comments” earlier, but which UH thought fit to remove.
Class and status were a part of Macaulay’s blueprint to raise a Westernized Indian elite, very much a mirror image of the patricians back home.
It was an assemblage well portrayed in Paul Scott’s character of Hari Kumar aka ” Harry Coomer”.
In sum what it achieved was a permanent alienation of its products from their roots, as they became sad caricatures once the Empire receded, to an ethos of extreme snobbery, ridiculing of non- elites and levels of imitation which seemed increasingly pathetic, given that they were always the ” Other” to those who inspired them.
Rishi and Humza in contrast represents a more indigenized and culturally aligned generation. Globalist but rooted. Not deracinated and confused as many of my ilk I describe above.
And in that sense rather ” classless” too.
Were you by any chance taught English by an American Ms Jafa?
No. Home Counties gentry.
Too many Z’s!
For example “Westernized”, “indigenized”, “Anglicization”.
I enjoyed the reference to ‘Jewel in the Crown’, particularly as this is the 40th anniversary of its TV appearance.
Well, it’s been almost three decades plus since the Americans took over the ” Indian mind”!
How very sad, but I have every confidence that you will resist that pernicious onslaught Ms Jafa.
The mind is certainly willing as the brainwashed part of me echoes Professor Higgins.
“Pernicious”? Charles! I’m scandalized!
All right ‘inevitable’ then, my mistake!
That is the vocabulary on the Unherd site and the Z in these words was part of the English vocabulary up until the 1970s or so.
Z seems to be making a revival, why?
Soon we will return to saying things such September the eleventh as we used to, rather than the eleventh of September, as we do now.
It’s that pernicious American influence, of course (let us tactfully draw a veil over the usage of the Oxford University Press – once again, see Fowler)
Careful, you may incur Alison’s wrath as I did!
Fowler has quite a lot to say about -ize vs -ise with the conclusion that by and large either is acceptable in the English-speaking world but -ize is compulsory in American English. This, I confess, is for me a conclusive argument for using -ise whenever possible.
Thank you, I always do the same, more out of habit than reason it must be said.
While it is possible to buy into the analysis of Razib Khan it is likely the reality is a bit more complex and nuanced than he might suggest. Speaking as one of those globalist East African South Asians in Britain since the 1960s I would say that my cohort has a very strong emotional and cultural bond to the subcontinent. Yes, we are globalists, we have adopted and integrated into Britain with all its positivity, it would be facile to say that we have no feelings or bonds to the mother country. It would be fair to say that inside of our souls there is a deep identification with the subcontinent, pride in its successes and frustration in its failures and rooting for its wellbeing. Now I would concede that light is not burning as brightly in our children and grand children’s generations where the ties are not first hand. In the case of Rishi Sunak it would be virtually impossible for him to detach himself from the tug of the mother country, be it through his parental bonds and adherence or for that matter of his wife and in-laws. That does not mean he would compromise on what is in the best interests of the UK (or in case of Yousaf Scotland or Varadkar Ireland likewise). I would like to think that this incredible happenstance offers a unique opportunity to strengthen the ties between UK and the sub-continent, breaking barriers and perhaps a degree of mistrust? As an aside I have to share a little private conversation I had with a First Secretary at the Pakistan High Commission in London in the early days of Sunak premiership. He was not aware I was from Indian origins and frankly shared his concern about how Sunak would deal with Pakistan. I reassured him that Sunak would always make choices that were in the best interests of the UK first and foremost and he would likely need to be seen not favouring India or antagonising Pakistan. None of that detracts from my foregoing perspective.
Nice post, but letting in 600,000 Indians and Africans in one year was not in the best interests of the UK. Sunak is nothing but a globalist shill.
I think you are referring to net migration figure of 600,000, large part of which comprised of Ukrainian and Hong Kong nationals and Overseas students. I do not see the logic of counting overseas students as part of inward immigration unless and until such time as they have completed their studies and taken up work and residence in the UK. Historically US has attracted most of the brain drain from India through education and research route and the amazing positive impact of that in their economy is for all to see. We on the other hand have historically tended to attract largely blue collar migrants. With the more selective points based system in place we are now attracting post graduate and post doctoral students who, should they opt to remain and have work offer, can only be productive for our country. The rest coming from IT, health care and social care sectors are those we desperately need as we have no prospect of training home grown alternatives in a foreseeable period in the numbers we need. As for “globalist Sunak” I doubt he will be worse for the country than either of his at least two immediate predecessors with all their fangled claims of talent. Sunak, probably on account of his ethnicity, was not the first choice of his party members and was only resorted to by their parliamentary party when they could see no better option in what was a desperate situation!
Sunak has let in 600,000 Indians and Africans to work in the hospitality industry, care homes and as nurses in hospitals. Go see for your self.
There are more than enough people here already to work in the health and social care sectors but they want proper wages and working conditions.
The problem with shortage of these sectors did not start with Sunak so I suggest your problem is with Indians and Africans – including Sunak. Why don’t you blame Sunak’s many predecessors who caused the problem in the first place. If you look at the numbers of places in our Universities available to train doctors and nurses you will find out for yourself in short order how long will it take to fill the vacancies, never mind those that will be retiring in the meantime as well. If it were not for the Indians (Asians) and Africans our NHS would collapse imminently! Have the grace to acknowledge facts as they are and not as you would like to fancy!
There is no shortage. There is only greed and an unwillingness to pay British people a proper wage. That unwillingness did not begin with Sunak. However, it was Sunak who imported so many foreigners in such a short time to fill jobs that should have been filled with British people.
Quite so, and it has been going on for years. In fact it is a national disgrace, but “greed conquers all” as they say.
Usual nonsense from mass immigration, globalisation crowd.
Why don’t you fix your sh&te countries instead of flooding the West?
Idea that most of the immigrants are somehow PhD students or brain surgeons is idiotic.
Most of them are just cheap labour.
Sunak as PM is a disgrace.
He had green card when working in Treasury and his wife made quite clear where her allegiances are.
I am immigrant myself but why natives of uk want to commit ethnic and cultural suicide by getting flooded by other cultures is beyond me.
It did not work well for Rome, did it?
I don’t think the majority are keen on ethnic and cultural suicide ….it’s a bit like Epstein’s ‘suicide’ perhaps – done to them rather than by them.
You are right mostly.
But I would say that the examples given are not the Macaulay-ites that we of a certain generation in India were. In a public school inspired ethos that upbringing involved a conscious erasure of ” Indianness” and an imitation of the ways, mores and attitudes of the British upper classes.
The end – products then became greatly alienated from the country of their birth, never really absorbing their native cultural roots, while always being the eternal ” Other” to the elites in Britain they sought to emulate( America never really featured as an inspirational trope).
Their pride lay in the degrees of Anglicization they had acquired, ranging from linguistic accents ( still recall being rapped on the knuckles for not pronouncing ” there” and ” shall” the ” proper” way)to musical, culinary and literary preferences. A good example of this deracinated Macaulay-esque Indian was Nehru, who prided himself on being ” the last Englishman” in India, as did countless other ” brown Sahibs and Memsahibs”, steeped in the same mind-sets.
I should think that Sunak and Humza are globalists, but also culturally more rooted in their traditional ethos.
Gandhi too, was never really comfortable with the elite accoutrements of his London days, and fashioned a more culturally grounded idiom as he returned to India and led the mass upsurges against colonial rule.
So even if globalist, none of the examples you cite are Macaulay-esque.
“Rishi Sunak was born in England, his father in Kenya, and his grandfather in Indian Punjab. But they were always of the world, their opportunities painted upon a canvas without a border.”
England, Kenya and the Punjab were all part of something smaller than the world. They were all part of the British Empire or Commonwealth. When Sunak was born in 1980, his father probably expected Sunak to make his life within the Commonwealth. It was only later that the opportunities to emigrate to the US for work in tech or finance arose.
If Rishi is no son of India, he’s no son of the UK either. So if the UK goes down the spout, he and his millions will be off somewhere else.
Call me reactionary, but I would like Britain’s PM’s fate to be more bound up with the country’s.
After sinking Britain Sunak will flee with his billions to his own country, California.
So the legacy of the second greatest Empire the world has ever seen lives on. Nothing particularly unusual about that is there?
Charles, could you possibly contact me on xxx Thanks.
A word to the wise – it is an extremely bad idea to post your personal email on a BTL fora like this, I recommend against.
Too true sadly!
Fifty years ago not so, but we only had the Royal Mail then.
Thanks. Sound advice.
Gosh! Have I really upset you that much?
Me not at all but I suspect you do not appreciate some background.
Quite probably, but what exactly do you mean in this particular instance?
If I wanted to discuss it in a public forum, I would not have suggested email. I am entirely friendly, trying to be constructive and I think it is probable that you will appreciate it.
Then let me guess. Be kind to Ms SGJ?
If I have it correctly, Ms SGJ is a graduate of SOAS, former Indian civil servant, quiet keen on ‘gender studies’ an authoress, and a frequent ‘blogger’.
As I recall she entered this forum quiet recently, of her own volition, on the Amritsar discussion, and was surprisingly, rather abusive. No matter it all ended amicably.
Today I thought she was somewhat inebriated by the exuberance of her own verbosity, and decided a little teasing wouldn’t go amiss.
I am sorry if this has upset you.
Your call. I am not upset just a pragmatist. You clearly have not grasped the issue bothering me. I guess one can take a horse to water but cannot make him drink.
I was minded to contact your email pretending to be Charles, but realised that trying to imitate Charles would be impossible.
Your too kind!
Gasp!
Indeed!
One is invigorating; two might be too much of a good thing.
I’m inclined to agree, but clearly some are unable to invigorate this debate in public, which is the intention of a Comments section.
Fair comment. In mitigation, I have on other occasions sought to be invigorating. In fact, a few days ago I overshot and my comment was voted the least popular of 165 comments with a large minus score. I am considering becoming less invigorating in future.
I would regard that as a badge of honour!
In my experience the ‘herd’ are invariably wrong!
ps. I shall have to see if my Chief of Staff approves of me taking up your offer of covert e-mail contact.
Much appreciated.
Consider it a mark of respect.
Come on Steve don’t be shy, let’s have your ‘pearls of wisdom’ on this interesting topic.
It’s no good just harping on about the inadequacy of others is it?
ps. I find that the ‘fighting dogs’ discussion on the other channel is slightly more interesting today.
Consider yourself lucky i didn’t take you to task for “your too kind” when it should be *you’re* !!!
(Sunak’s too boring to comment on.)
Correct, but “i”?
Mr John Solomon would despair of us both!
Ha!
i think you’re right, although Solomon is NOT tmCS the font of all wisdom!
Clearly he’s not. Otherwise he would know what tmCS means……..
🙂
Not a clue….fortunately!
So, for people of the left and also of the new trade-barrier Brexit right, these are the “wrong kind of Asians”.
Well, Modi is a believer in the ‘Second Globe’ of the nationalist-populists, the Brics model of alternative globalisation. He must be relieved that L’il Kim of the DPRK has joined them now. The after-dinner chats between Lula and Orban must be interesting. Rishi, the choice is yours…
Inexplicable navigation error!
Thanks. I was trying to puzzle out the allegorical significance of attack dogs in a discussion about Sunak and was struggling.
Very profound!