Sons of Pakistani Bus Drivers

How ‘ministerial flop’ became favourite to succeed Theresa May as PM

It’s an interesting article about Sajid Javed and the fact that he is the favorite to succeed TM as PM.

Of course I’m dismissing the hype but the battle between the sons of the Pakistani Bus Drivers is going to be an interesting feature in British Politics. Even though my politics are quite Tory I’m quite sympathetic to Sadiq Khan as I find him more “authentic” than Sajid Javid.

I am of course at risk of hypocrisy because I’m suspect of assimilation while I welcome integration.

As an aside both Sadiq Khan and Sajid Javed were favourites of the Chancellors, Brown and Osborne. Sajid Javed was arm-twisted by David Cameron and George Osborne into supporting the Remain while he was a Eurosceptic but they guilted him into the fact that he owed his political career to them. Mind you Sajid Javed’s last paycheck in the private sector was apparently £3mn and he is self-made (unlike most Tory Politicians) so he’s probably talented than most but there is this earnestness to fit in that is very typical of coloured Tories (to be whiter than white).

They deeply relied on the patronage of wily white men to get through the party and the dramatic ethnic shifts we are seeing in the West must seem like something out of the Roman Empire.

I do remember that there were an astonishing high number of Pakistanis who were interested in politics (both parties). It does make sense Pakistani culture is very extroverted, loves to network and we are usually able to do it without drinking (heavily). Not drinking in a culture drenched in alcohol has distinct advantages..

16 thoughts on “Sons of Pakistani Bus Drivers”

  1. I would say Pakistani at least in UK had the first movers advantage vis-v Indians. Pakistanis with tighter embrace of US and ambiguous attitude towards UK during the colonial period gave them a distinct advantage over India. The Tariq ali’s and the Imran Khans of the world were toast of the town(not withstanding our occasional export, the Pankaj Mishras and Amartya sens. ), coupled with Ayub pro western/capitalist as well as greater growth figure was the best model for the west. A third world country with a modern dictator.

    “In his victory speech on Thursday, Khan spoke of growing up in a Pakistan that was rising, and of witnessing its subsequent decline as governance collapsed and corruption blossomed. Though he did not mention India in this context, the comparison would have been apt. In the 1950s and 1960s Pakistan enjoyed robust economic growth and Western accolades. My Pakistani friends never tire of telling me how South Korean experts would visit Islamabad to learn about development.

    That 1978 test series pitted relatively prosperous and well-travelled Pakistanis against an Indian team that – notwithstanding Sunil Gavaskar’s endurance and Kapil Dev’s youthful energy – seemed to embody the brittleness of India’s permit-paralysed experiment with socialism.”

    I would say give it couple of decades and we will catch up (if we haven’t already) with Pakistanis 😛

  2. I can agree Sadiq Khan more “authentic” in the sense of medievalist mindset. He is vaguely telling Muslims in the UK Sharia is possible and thy have to be simply patient and accommodating. Before he became Mayor, his statement 2 years back saying Moderate Muslims are Uncle Toms . When the radio host asked him on that, he backtracked saying he should not have used such words. With Mayoral post dangling in front of him , he just used some weasel words. With no such incentive , he like any medievalist would hav averred that people like Majid Nawaz are a sell-out and Uncle Toms .

    Khan is not a modernizing force among Muslims .

    British politics encourages lot of hypocrisy and Labour is in cahoots with such people. That is , for all the Tory disarray, Labour is not able to make headway

  3. What Zack says is true i.e Pakistanis heavily involved in UK politics and political parties. I admire them for it.

    The reason is that Pakistani immigrants were less educated than Indians. So, they were forced to take greater risks in their professions. To be a politician one needs to be risk taking personality.

    The flipside of this situation is that proportionally there is more representation from the former in crime and jail population – i.e. risks gone bad.

    At a deeper level , I think many Muslims have/had unrealistic expectations from the host societies and when these expectations gone sour – like Rushdie still thriving – they take more interest in the society and polity that caused their frustrations.

    1. “The reason is that Pakistani immigrants were less educated than Indians. So, they were forced to take greater risks in their professions. To be a politician one needs to be risk taking personality.”

      This doesn’t explain the fact that the people who do eventually make it into politics aren’t really uneducated (quite the opposite). Also why aren’t other ethnicities who are lagging in education not as visible in politics? Say, like Bangladeshis or Carribeans?

      Another explanation might be that the social cohesion of the Pakistani community gives them an advantage over the others in fptp parliamentary systems. And this cohesion arose in no small part due to the need for defending their culture from the British mainstream. That they are less assimilationist is the reason they are more successful in politics than others. The flip side of this is of course, the crimes etc

      Finally, this also means if Pakistanis integrate more into mainstream British society, they will no longer have disproportionate (compared to other minority ethnicities) representation in politics.

      1. Wrong analogy since the cohesive Mirpuris are not nearly as prominent as the Jhelumites/Lahoris, who are much more prosperous.

        If Mirpuri was a separate ethnicity the remaining Brit PAK (30%) would probably have very favourable stats (just a hunch)..

      2. Khan was a son of bus driver . Even though he went to law school, the family legends and social anxieties become more important for 1st or even 2nd generation immigrants. Individuals can’t shake off their community’s economic angst , especially coming from a poor background both in Pakistan and Britain.

      3. About how parliamentary system is manipulated by some communities, that is a separate topic itself. There have been cases which have been proved in the court and party proceedings, how community leaders cast votes on behalf of their followers which is against the spirit of democracy and illegal. Allegations of local Labour party being manipulated in this way has come up again and again. There should be many more unproven cases. These things come to light because the disgruntled members from the same community blow the whistle

    1. How about phenotype behind the success? The London Mayor guy, I would not recognize as south Asian unless pointed out. Middle eastern white look helps than a Krishna Menon look.

      1. I think Khan looks like a typical Punjabi.
        Phenotype doesn’t matter. He has been smart in making his political moves .
        Khan used to defend outright extremists as a human rights lawyer. In Britain lawyer like that earn quite a lot. Usually the extremists will get legal defence at public expense and there’s no limit on the expense . The proceedings can last for months and a defence lawyer like Khan will be charging 100 or 200 or even 500 £ per hour. So lawyers like him are extremely rich at public expense.

  4. Labour party is stuck in an anti-antisemitism row. Anti-semitism has been on the downtrend in western societies after WW2. With the influx of Muslim immigrants in the last few decades , it has been given a new lease of life. It is making Labour Party less attractive to the general population

  5. I guess he’d have looked pretty ‘South Asian’ had he lived in India or Pakistan.
    Regular physical exercise and diet do affect you.

    Priti Patel doesn’t look much like desi Patels either.

    Reminds me of what Zack says about Californians i.e. all of them look alike irrespective of race.

    1. It is not just diet and exercise , and also how you speak in public , how you bear yourself , conduct yourself, etc which are influenced by dominant (and desirable) images in the society, not to speak of you are vetted on these things to appear like a typical British gent before you rise to the political (or other areas) top

Comments are closed.

Brown Pundits