Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the chemical tycoon, billionaire, Manchester United co-owner and one of the wealthiest people supposedly in Britain, is under fire after saying Britain has been ‘colonised' by immigrants.
As he put it:
You can't afford … you can't have an economy with 9 million people on benefits and huge levels of immigrants coming in. The UK is being colonised by immigrants, really, isn't it?
Three things.
First, Ratcliffe left Britain some time ago. He lives as a tax exile and migrant in Monaco. The irony of that should not be ignored. Apparently, the rich can be mobile. No one else may be.
Second, if there are nine million people in the UK on benefits, it is because of the massive wealth inequality in the UK. Ratcliffe has created this problem. He could call for higher taxation to help solve it.
Third, I wonder how many of those Ratcliffe is abusing support Manchester United, and how many around the world will be alienated from doing so as a result of his racist comment? This feels like a Gerald Ratner moment.
Ratcliffe reveals his staggering level of indifference, naivete or stupidity with these comments.
For once, Starmer made the right reaction. Farage could not help but jump in with his own vile comment, based on the politics of hate, division and racism, which he has made his only speciality:
We need a politics for people, based on a politics of care, to fund the future.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
All true what you say but it is also true that his opinion is shared by a very large proportion of the Country. You have to move on for calling every comment about immigration “racist” if there is to be proper discussion on the subject
It is racist.
There is no issue to discuss
Why do you think there is?
And when is the concern greatest where there are fewest migrants?
His do you think the country could survive without them?
No you don’t.
People who are anti-immigration are, without exception, racist.
Many of them start a comment with
‘I’m not racist, but…’
The world we live in has been built on immigration for hundreds of years.
If it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck then the chances are…
Rattcliffe has uttered racist language, pur sang.
Where does one start with such offensiveness? First of all, I’m Irish, so an immigrant, and I’m embarrassed and ashamed to support the club he has a stake in. Then there is the number of immigrants who play for the first team, as well as the many in the club’s other male and female teams, and the academy system. Nine million on benefits also includes the many who work but don’t earn enough to survive without the benefits they are entitled to. And, as many have pointed out, the UK population in 2020 was 67m, not 58m. He’s also looking for government money to regenerate the area around the new stadium, which a lot of fans say is not necessary anyway.
All to agree with.
4th. He either lied or fabricated the population statistics to make it appear that Britain is experiencing massive growth in the population. He claimed that in 2020 there were 58 million people in the UK and now it’s 70 million. It’s easily enough to google but what he said is a lie. A racist lie.
And if he lied about that why should we even listen to him?
And if he lives in Monaco, how would he know? Unless of course he migrates himself. One rule for the elite, destruction for everyone else.
Leave our democracy alone.
So angry.
There were 67 million people here in 2020.
Yet another example of the fact that being rich turns many people into horrible hypocrites, peddling lies to the gullible poor who created their ‘wealth’ in the first place. Why does anyone look up to such miserable people?
Lennon had it right way back in 1971 https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=gimme+some+truth+lennon&&mid=22658CC632F16104B13522658CC632F16104B135&mcid=59690F575FCD43AB9362694D22A9BAA4&FORM=VAMGZC
Agreed
It has been extensively researched. See for example: https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/wealth-empathy.html
Increases in wealth reliably reduce empathy. It’s a sickness. Caused by the love of money. Tolkein’s ring.
This is not good for people and it’s not good for societies. It’s disastrous for nature.
But being devil’s advocate for a second, ought we not to protect them from themselves, for they lack the ability to even understand the damage they cause? Do we not have a moral obligation to try to help them too, by reducing inequality? Because I don’t think they even have the apparatus to understand the pain and destruction they cause to millions of other people. They are emotionally handicapped. Severely in many cases.
Although it’s clear where blame lies, I don’t think it’s healthy to seek blame and retribution when trying to solve a problem. But that’s what the mainstream media requires. *sigh. I get so angry, so I try to rationalise the anger, ameliorate its negative effects in me. Setting aside emotion, I feel less angry when I reason that the system settings are all wrong, that’s all. And people who are severely emotionally handicapped aren’t in the best position to fix anything.
There needs to be a negative feedback loop built into the economy. And all the work has been done (thank you Richard et al.) Currently the economy is set to have a positive feedback loop by default. Positive feedback loops are useful for temporarily moving a system away from its set point, and they are crucial in situations requiring a swift, decisive outcome. However, if left unchecked, positive feedback loops can be harmful and even catastrophic, by driving the system too far in one direction (such as melting ice caps).
They are used very sparingly in nature, if at all.
It’s very odd to be finding myself thinking that we need to help these people, but I do feel sorry for them. Genuinely. They will never know simple happiness or contentment. They will never know love. They live a whole life and completely miss the point of it.
But the crux of the matter is that you can’t help someone who doesn’t want to change.
So we have to change the system. It’s the only way.
Much to agree with
I still believe – perhaps naïve of me – that we can still have mega self-enrichment (especially when based on a succesful idea you brought to market) together with a fair redistribution of wealth.
I would certainly give tax incentives when business ideas create value for people and the planet.
I was raging when I saw this yesterday, raging.
Such lazy generalisations and disgusting remarks. Some people get lucky, get rich. And being rich begets being richer.
These Ratcliffe types are so out of touch – my hope is that eventually, people boycott their products and their business suffer. Probably never happen, but…
And what of the reporter? No challenge whatsover to the comments.
Slightly off tangent – be very interesting what happens in the court case of Prince William vs The Daily Mail… Leveson 2 needs to happen.
Ratcliffe was already toxic in Scotland for partnering with the Chinese to run the Grangemouth refinery into the ground. He, like Farage, has no interest in the little people he exploits other than as tools to increase their obscene wealth, is Ratcliffe’s case now safely tucked away in Monaco. His attitude to Manchester United has simply reinforced this impression of self-righteous indifference to others. Like all the other wealthy economic migrants he reeks of hypocrisy.
The only thing Sky questioned was use of the word “colonisation” and they specifically agreed that migrants use up resources.
Looking up one of the many football stats websites, the current male Manchester United squad has 19 out of 26 non-british players (73%).
As I thought
Its ‘rage-bait’ – designed to elicit outrage, which it duly got. Pity he wasn’t politely asked, that , as he had got so many things wrong – notably Brexit – that maybe he was a little bit stupid, and would he ‘de-colonise’ the Manchester United first team? Ridicule much better than rage.
Richard
Do you have more details about the people who read/follow and are genuinely interested in your work, blog and opinions/theories etc?
Would you ever consider conducting a survey and asking specific questions to your audience in order to determine their ethnic background, immigration/employment status etc?
Perhaps it something to think about doing at the forthcoming conference?
As there is no guarantee it would be statistically valid I am not sure how useful that would be.
From YouTube we know our audience is about 80% male and majority over age 50.
The real problem is the incessant media exposure these appalling people get, unchallenged by journalists, not worth the title, who either don’t do their homework or simply act as ideological conduits.
He doesn’t like people on benefits. That didn’t stop him taking his massive tax payer subsidy to build his plastics plant. He does believe in benefits. Just so long as they’re for him.
He should apologise for misinformation.
He should apologise for reinforcing prejudice against those in society who often get categorised as “undesirable and undeserving”…be them benefit claimants, migrants or any other group.
He is ‘othering’ to continue to divisive narrative. This needs opposing not ideologically, but with facts and real life solutions.
And on top of that as you rightly pointed out, he is a tax exile and migrant. How do all those patriots square that? Perhaps they will doff their cap to their social superiors and congratulate him for being successful.
Leading politicians and high profile people like Ratcliffe should at least be given an official warning about their hate speech. Seems more dangerous than holding up a placard opposing genocide- which has put people in prison ‘on remand’ for months.
I agree.
I remember a time when football was called, the people’s game. I think that applied to all people.
Yes, it is ironic, the Premier League is one of the most multicultural football leagues in the world. It makes a load of money for the tax exile.
I look at Jim Ratcliffe and he is the epitome of everything I hate about being a man.
Legal migration is a problem to be discussed, from 1950 to 2005 the population increased from 50 to 60 million, in 55 years. From 2005 to 2026 the population grew from 60 million to 70 million, in 21 years. Countries don’t build the infrastructure needed for these increases, schools, hospitals, housing and water.
They could have done.
Stop being stupid.
Further evidence in support of my theory that the primary attribute required in order to become ludicrously rich is to be a total asshole.
I do like the trend to call such people “the Epstein class”. So much better than pretending they are ‘elite’!
Terrible hairstyles help!
As may be seen the hypocrites apology is no such thing. I believe he conforms to the law of diminishing responsibility – The more money one has the less control one has of ones brain. He is a peddler of lies. The government and all of its agents, together with the Greater Manchester Council should be withdrawing ALL financial support from him and his companies immediately. Another sign of just how corrupt the UK is – he is a knight of the realm too. He follows in the footsteps of another of his immediate Monaco neighbours Sir Phillip Green (and his Lady), its likely they moor-up together and share cocktails on their sun-decks, quipping about taking the money and the Michael out of the UK. What a creep! Of course his view is a completely false one as a mere glance at the official figures demonstrates.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/longterminternationalmigrationprovisional/yearendingjune2025
I’m a Manchester United season ticketholder and was horrified by his appalling and ill-informed remarks. He’s only given airtime because of his ownership of the club and if he really does hold these odious views he should keep them to himself, how do all the employees and fans of immigrant families feel? I was in Munich last week to commemorate the 1958 crash. A solemn occasion representing the best of our club. A contrast to Ratcliffe, a total embarassment.
Thanks Kevan.
I’ll even forgive you supporting Man U for that.
Do you think he meant all migrants or was a comment on uncontrolled immigration? There is a clear difference. Although your narrative suggests the former.
With the numbers he used he must have been talking about all migrants – including all those on whom his businesses no doubt rely.
Leaving aside his disgusting racist language (for which he has NOT apologised), and his ignorant or deceitful misrepresentation of UK population statistics, it’s worth noting that Ineos has made a pig’s ear of running the football operations at Man Utd. He is now pretty much as reviled as the Glazer family by the supporters. His suggestion that the UK government has anything to learn from his management of the club is risible.
Didnt ‘Sir Jim’ ruin the cycling as well?
It really is time we stopped subsidising the wealthy, non-productive parts of our economy, like Mr. Ratcliffe.
Last I looked, the land mass now named the UK has been receiving immigrants since before the sinking of Doggerland, about 8,200 years ago.
The question is for whom is Mr. Ratcliffe pimping, and what will he acquire in return. Some enterprising journalists must like good hounds be following the trail.
Well I was astounded that an immigrant uses this sort of language.
We could just as easily say that Monaco has been colonised by white Brits. In the same interview he moans about lack of growth following Brexit, which he supported and then moved most of his businesses out of Britain.
How much money do these people need?
I’d definitely recommend reading the book “The art of spending money” by Morgan Housel – spending money makes you happy for a while but not long, spend money that makes you content, don’t chase other peoples dreams. It introduces the concept of a reverse obituary – an obituary that you would like people to write about yourself then focus on that. Guaranteed that it won’t revolve around getting more money it will be about being kind, being loved, doing the right thing.
There is a fossilised skeleton in Nairobi airport welcoming back home all visitors as descendents of mitochondrial Eve.
And in that sense the entire World population is there as a result of “colonisation” by migrants….
Just seen an article where Sir Jim R is sorry that “some people have taken offence” at his comments. A classic non-apology apology of an entitled buffoon (we’ve had a few). This idiot clearly isn’t aware of Desmond Healy’s First law of Holes … When you are in one, stop digging.
I feel sad for the poor people of Monaco having to suffer the consequences of the presence of such rude and intolerant migrants as Mr Radcliffe. However, I hope that they retain him a bit (lot) longer … Perhaps it would help by reminding themselves that we are all migrants….
Thanks
The Wikipedia page on the demographics of the UK has a nice table showing the UK population, and births and deaths, and net immigration, for each census period since 1851.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Kingdom
OK, so UK population increased by about 4 million from 2011 to 2021. From about 63 million to about 67 million. That was about 7%.
But this is not the first time the UK’s population has grown relatively rapidly. UK population increased by about 4 million from 1901 to 1911, from about 38 million to about 42 million. More than 10%. But not due to migration – on average, there were more than a million new babies each year. Think about the burden of healthcare, and schools, and the demand for jobs.
In fact the UK population was increasing at around 1% per year from 1861 through to about 1911, then about 0.5% per year from 1911 to 1971, and then at much lower rates in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, before returning to about 0.5% per year since then.
There has been a big bulge in legal migration in the post-Brexit period. But none of that, by any means, can be described as “colonisation”.