Many persons may come with exclusive symbols of religion, caste, race, beliefs etc. When these persons come in isolation, there is not much of a problem; and in most cases, they would cease to wear them, as there would not be an appreciating or approving crowd; and no one to disapprove if they stop wearing them. Yet, when the single person later becomes a part of a crowd, then the whole proposition changes, and the wearing of the symbol becomes a sort of offensive posture to fend off a defensive sense of inferiority. This problem in itself doesnt create a problem; yet, there is a virus that has started ticking.
See this illustration: One lady in India told me an incident. She was travelling in a private bus. In the front seat one woman, wearing a dress, which had a markedly religious connotation of a particular religion, was sitting. The lady who told the story was standing in front of this woman, for the conductor had informed her that this woman would be getting up in the next bus-stop. In front of this lady was another woman wearing a similar dress, which, more or less, identified her as of the same religion. When the bus stopped in the next bus stop, and the woman got up to alight, she suddenly gave a nudge to the woman in front and signalled her to occupy the seat.
Here, what had taken place was an action of solidarity for the other woman who was very accurately identified as of the same religion. Now the same type of closed minded solidarity could be seen to be involuntarily displayed by persons, when they start wearing dresses and symbols that gives a sense that they are a group apart, and need to fend for each other. And can create social disintegration, which the English nations can do without.
