Visram, Gilliat-Ray and Mellor and ADF
-
The practice of bringing Indian servants to the UK, particularly through the East India Company, began in the early 18th century as British officials, merchants, and military personnel returned home with their Indian servants. As Visram notes, "the custom of importing Indian servants and ayahs into Britain probably began in the early eighteenth century, if not earlier" (Visram, 11).
Several factors motivated this practice, including the convenience of having ayahs care for children during long sea voyages and the desire to replicate the lavish lifestyles many had enjoyed in India. Indian servants were often perceived as status symbols and provided a more affordable alternative to European domestics. However, this focus on luxury and convenience often overshadowed the harsh realities and repercussions of such practices. The British were more concerned with their own comfort and social standing than with the welfare of the individuals they brought with them. It wasn't that they were unaware of the challenges faced by Indian servants; rather, they chose to ignore these issues, demonstrating a troubling lack of empathy for the human cost of their imperial pursuits.
Upon arrival in Britain, many of these individuals faced neglect, left to navigate life in a foreign land without contracts or plans for returning home. The existence of advertisements seeking runaway servants underscores the exploitation and dire circumstances they often encountered. Ultimately, while Britain’s imperial endeavors facilitated the arrival of Indian servants, the significant hardships and exploitation they faced highlight the oppressive nature of colonialism and its devastating impact on those subjected to its effects.
British racism against Yemenis, Arabs, and Somalis in the early to mid-20th century was rooted in economic and cultural prejudices, often linked to their socio-economic status and cultural practices. Communities like Butetown (Tiger Bay) initially fostered a sense of solidarity, as exemplified by Olive Salaman, who integrated into Yemeni culture and cared for orphaned Muslim children. However, the urban regeneration of the 1960s led to the displacement of these communities, marginalizing them and eroding their social cohesion.
In contrast, Islamophobia tends to conflate race and religion, portraying Muslims as inherently suspicious or threatening. This shift simplifies complex historical prejudices, focusing on religious identity.
Overall, while early British racism against these communities laid the groundwork for anti-Arab and anti-"coloured" sentiment, Islamophobia represents a more generalized and religiously motivated form of racism that overlooks the diversity and complexity within Muslim identities.
After reading Grace's response, I think that she provides a very strong analysis, nothing to add really.