British Indian elites align with Farage’s anti-immigrant politics: a symptom of postcolonial nostalgia and neoliberal disillusionment

The framing overlooks how diasporic communities, particularly those from former British colonies, often inherit colonial mentalities that valorise assimilation into dominant cultures while rejecting marginalised groups within their own communities. This is evident in the uncritical embrace of figures like Modi and Farage, who both promote exclusionary nationalism. Indigenous critiques of nationalism, such as those from First Nations or Dalit activists, are entirely absent from this discourse.

The alignment of British Indians with Farage echoes historical patterns where diasporic elites have aligned with nationalist movements in their host countries, often as a reaction to perceived threats to their status. This mirrors the support for Enoch Powell among some British South Asians in the 1960s, as well as the role of Irish-Americans in supporting nationalist movements in Ireland. The narrative of 'putting Britain first' also reflects a broader historical trend of nationalist movements exploiting postcolonial anxieties.

In South Africa, the Indian diaspora has historically aligned with both the apartheid regime and later with nationalist movements, reflecting a complex relationship with power and identity. Similarly, in Fiji, Indo-Fijians have oscillated between support for indigenous-led governments and nationalist movements, often driven by economic and social insecurity. These patterns suggest that diasporic politics are not monolithic but are shaped by local contexts and historical grievances.

Research on diasporic politics shows that economic precarity and perceived cultural threat are strong predictors of support for nationalist and far-right movements among immigrant communities. Studies also highlight how elite narratives within diasporas can amplify or legitimise far-right rhetoric, particularly when tied to nationalist or religious identity. The alignment of British Indians with Farage aligns with these patterns, though further empirical analysis is needed to quantify the drivers.

Artistic and spiritual traditions often critique nationalism as a form of idolatry, where the nation-state becomes an object of worship. In contrast, diasporic communities like the British Indians in this story often frame nationalism as a source of pride and belonging, reflecting a tension between spiritual universalism and political tribalism. The uncritical embrace of figures like Farage and Modi also reflects a spiritual crisis, where material security is sought through political power rather than collective liberation.

If current trends continue, the alignment of diasporic elites with far-right movements could further polarise British politics, particularly in areas with high immigrant populations. This may lead to increased intra-community conflict, as marginalised groups within diasporas resist the nationalist narratives promoted by elites. Future scenarios also suggest that economic crises could exacerbate these trends, driving more communities toward exclusionary politics.

The narrative entirely excludes the voices of British Indian Muslims, who are often targeted by both Farage’s rhetoric and Hindu nationalist narratives. It also ignores the experiences of low-wage British Indian workers, who are more likely to be affected by austerity and anti-immigrant policies than the elite figures driving this alignment. The framing of 'putting Britain first' obscures the shared struggles of working-class communities across ethnic lines.