Public transport today is plagued by two things that make even the shortest journey a trial: the incessant blare of electronic devices and the collapse of basic standards of conduct. English people are not saints on buses or trains, but it is simply observable that certain groups (often recently arrived and unfamiliar with local norms) are disproportionately responsible for turning a shared journey into an ordeal.
A bus ride can be entirely civilised when passengers behave with ordinary consideration. Too often, however, one encounters the opposite. You might ask: Why not simply tell the person to turn the volume down? In practice, the problem is now so widespread that one would have to spend an entire journey policing it. Worse, there are genuine risks in confronting antisocial behaviour in cities where social cohesion has frayed.
The killing of Thomas Parker in 2023 is a stark example. His brother politely asked that loud music be turned down on the Elizabeth Line; an argument followed, and at Reading station, Parker was chased and struck with a horseshoe, killing him. This interracial murder never became a national moral parable in the way others have. It illustrates that the stakes are no longer a bit of posturing and “fisticuffs”; the cost of speaking up can be lethal. I do not cite the case to discourage assertiveness, but to underline the need for judgment in a climate where social norms have weakened.
Transport for London claims to understand the problem, yet its public messaging often feels like gaslighting. Advertising campaigns show the nuisance as a middle-aged white man, despite the obvious demographic reality on the ground. This reflects a wider institutional habit: the pressure to uphold a narrative rather than address the public’s lived experience.
Of course, a white, middle-aged commuter may behave badly. But the people most frequently causing disturbance (“urban youth,” recent arrivals, or groups indifferent to local custom) are conspicuously absent from TfL’s portrayals. That omission is political, not accidental.
There is a simple truth: if Britain had maintained a stable demographic and cultural core, many of these problems would be marginal or non-existent. Remigration, sensibly and humanely implemented, would go further than any poster campaign in restoring order. Short of that, there must be real penalties for antisocial noise.
Public transport staff should treat playing loud music as seriously as fare evasion. A bus should not continue until the nuisance stops or the offender is removed. On trains, staff or police should patrol and enforce standards consistently, something that would itself act as a deterrent.
Alongside enforcement, positive social pressure matters. Clear notices (truthful ones, not ideological fabrications) could encourage civility:
“Be considerate; keep the volume low.”
“Many people read or rest when travelling; respect the quiet.”
Combined with firm consequences, such messaging would begin to re-civilise public space.
The law already exists. In 2023, Oluseun Olumide Olaifa was charged after blasting music through a speaker on the Jubilee Line. TfL byelaws explicitly prohibit causing annoyance through amplified sound without written permission. Yet prosecutions remain rare, not because the behaviour is rare, but because enforcement is absent.
When no staff are present, offenders behave with impunity, and multicultural realities then oblige authorities to expand personnel and resources to manage problems that would scarcely arise in a cohesive society. This dynamic is repeated across countless domains of public life.
It will fall to a serious patriotic movement (one unafraid to speak plainly about the causes of decline) to restore civility, enforce standards, and reverse the demographic and cultural erosion that made such problems inevitable. Until then, we are left managing symptoms of a deeper disorder.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-65137494
https://www.mylondon.news/news/transport/tfl-already-power-crack-down-32354414
