To What Extent is Islamaphobia a Problem in British Society - Essay Example

? ISLAMAPHOBIA IN THE UK: HISTORY, PREJUDICE AND POLITICS By (you and Number Introduction The term islamaphobia needs noclarification, or does it? Today when one thinks of the term, visions of 911, the train bombing in Spain, the subway bombings in London come immediately to mind, reinforcing the concept that the religion of Islam is one of violence, and that its followers are interested only in the destruction of western civilization. That image is nothing new; its visage has been part of western culture for centuries, driven by accounts of the Crusaders years-long struggles against the infidels. Given these images it is easy to become islamaphobic, to perceive anyone associated with the particular religious practice as a fanatic—a potential enemy. That concept has seen a significant rise in the UK, and the reasons for it, while somewhat understandably valid, are deluded and overstated. An Inherited Tradition: The Crusades and The New Crusade While islamaphobia might be something new to the United States since 911, it is certainly well entrenched in the thinking of people of the United Kingdom. Beginning with the Crusades, particularly those of Richard the Lionhearted and other British kings who went off to “fight the good fight” against the Muslims, a natural tendency has developed to mistrust Muslims as treacherous and determined to destroy Christianity, and along with it Western civilization. Feffer (2010) in his defense of Islam writes that the UK culture itself has promoted this notion throughout the ages by reinforcing it in subtle ways, including the teaching and analysis of such epic poems as The Song of Roland, which he contends places untrue emphasis upon the slaughter of Charlemagne’s troops as described in the poem by Muslim warriors. ‘In the real battle of 778, the slayers of the Franks were [really] Christian Basques furious at Charlemagne for pillaging their city of Pamplona’ (Feffer, 2010: par. 3). The intimation is that a poet with political and religious purposes retooled the truth to make the incident seem like a ‘cross against crescent holy war…the archetypal ‘clash of civilizations between the followers of Jesus and the followers of Mohammed’ (Feffer 2010: par. 3). From 1500-1600 the ‘crusade’—verbal, psychological and historical—continued against the Ottoman Empire, passing from one generation to another stories of the atrocities of the Ottoman Empire and their Muslim leaders, defaming, as it went, all of its followers. Ongoing as well was the attitude that Muslims and Islam continually attempted to hide their violent ill-intentioned tendencies under the guise of the peaceful dictates of the Koran. Today that attempt is still being challenged in every respect and from every side, and by his own admission, from a Christian perspective, by Dunkin (2010) in his official condemnation, Ten Myths About Islam. Dunkin writes the following: Jihad is still alive and well today, and is not just the province of a few militant radicals. The forcible advancement of Islam, coupled with a contrived hatred for the Western world, appeals to the hearts and minds of millions of disaffected Muslims worldwide, many of them young and eager to give their lives in the cause of Allah. Many well-educated Muslims, in the Middle East and in the West, have taken hold of the intellectual cause of Islamism and support this jihad wholeheartedly. (Myth #7) With academics such as Dunkin fanning the flames of anti-religious perception, it is not difficult to reason that such ideas have continued to find their way into modern UK thinking, in a world much more diverse and thus, for many, much more threatening. Islamaphobia and Politics As a prejudice which has developed over centuries, it seems clear that at least one political group in the UK, namely the British National Party and its Campaign Against Islam, presents a clear if not pervasive view of Islam as a violent entity detrimental to the interests of Britain and the British population. With media at their access, a Truth About Islam poster deliberately and without opportunity for challenge projects the image of Islam as a promoter of intolerance, slaughter, looting, arson and molestation of women. Citing the progression of anti-Muslim rhetoric, Merali and Shadjareh (2002) write, ‘Ten years back it was au fait to be polemical and talk about the continuing crusade in the British / Western psyche...But somewhere along the line, we got academic, the race industry moved in, we grew up and the term “Islamaphobia” was born’ (Merali and Shadjareh, 2002: 3). In short, With 911 and subsequent global terror attacks in the west, every manner of suspicion once harbored privately is now in the open. Whether the UK wants to admit it or not, the thinking has become an extension of a new populace racist crusade. The flurry of attacks and abuse encountered by Muslims living in the United Kingdom and other places indicate a reaction is taking place that began with 911. The reaction, some say sadly, is directed against the faith itself and all of its adherents. None are to be trusted. A series of reports done by the Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) since 911 reveal ‘widespread incidents of violent assault, verbal abuse and attacks on property of Muslim people’ (Jawad and Benn, 2004: xii) And from all indications, the violence has been growing over time. In 2007 an assault on a London imam highlighted fears that Muslims were suffering a sharp increase in race attacks. Attacks on Muslims and mosques in the north of England are generally blamed by authorities on heightened community tensions brought on by the bungled terror attacks in London's West End and at Glasgow airport. By 2009 violent demonstrations, also in northern England, by groups such as the Stop Islamization of Europe caused British government officials to warn of a rise in right wing activity designed to cause friction between ethnic groups. By 2010, violent activity against Muslim immigrants had increased, egged on by groups and websites such as Bare Naked Islam with battle cries resounding, ‘It isn’t Islamaphobia when they really are trying to kill you!’ Aside from the rising tide of open violence against Muslims, political stances taken lately are helping the cause of islamaphobia in more subtle and perhaps in even more damaging ways. Supporters of the Muslim cause interpreted a fiery speech by Prime Minister David Cameron as a step toward recognizing what he called ‘non-violent extremism’ as a ‘step toward terrorism’ (Githens-Mazer, 2011: par. 1) For the politically naive this statement may seem obvious, even innocuous. However, when analyzed the context and intimation of Cameron’s statement can be taken as an outsider’s analysis of Islam itself and its customs and traditions, often perceived by those outside of it as ‘extreme’. As example, the wearing of the veil by Muslim women may seem to non-Muslims extreme. It is then perceived as a sign of belligerence against English laws and customs, which can then be easily translated into an islamaphobic attitude about the wearer and the wearer’s intentions. It is an interesting point. The issue is, when Britain’s high government officials begin making such statements one wonders what the public will extrapolate from them that contribute to attitudes and acts against anyone practicing the religion as an ‘extremist’, and thereby, terrorist. As Githens-Mazer (2011) charges, and perhaps rightly so, “Cameron's speech has definitively laid out an approach to terrorism based on emotion rather than evidence…This is not because Cameron ignores the real and awful threat of terrorism, but because he has chosen to link terrorism with identity…’ (par. 8-9). Women as Easy Targets Gender-based islamaphobia can be discussed within the context of women. Kawad and Benn (2004) in their report found that, ‘Muslim women were high amongst the victims of retribution, targeted because of their religious visibility’ (p. xiii). A case study of female Islamic teachers in England reinforces the point: Whilst the Muslim women would share many experiences with other teachers at the start of their career, their religious 'visibility', (for most had adopted the hijab, or headscarf, as a symbol of their faith), added dimensions of prejudice and discrimination to their experiences. These included, for some, feelings of isolation, disillusionment, of disadvantage, of being de-skilled and victimised. Although the subtle nuances of religious prejudice are difficult to identify, the weight of evidence across these multiple case studies suggests that professional development in the women's early teaching careers was adversely affected by their Muslim identity. (Jawad and Benn, 2004: 131) In a relatively powerless position, Muslim teachers showed a greater determination to pass and forward their careers than to challenge situations clearly islamaphobic. ‘For example…[one teacher] was asked by her class teacher if she was “… going to indoctrinate the children” when she asked if she could teach Islam in the Religious Education lessons’ (Jawad and Benn, 2004:141). The hijab or headscarf itself seems the entre for an islamaphobic reaction from verbal to physical abuse, from every corner of society, including from other ethnic groups who may or may not consider Muslims as diminishing their lot in British society or as immigrants get coupled with the terrorist identity. The risk of attack is far greater in smaller suburban communities which are less cosmopolitan and open minded than cities. Such attacks often occur in public places, in full view of passers-by, who rarely if ever help the victim. (Lambert and Githens Mazer, 2010: 120) This latter reality may speak volumes about the attitude of British men toward Muslim women as undeserving of the chivalry generally accorded females. Islamaphobia: A Gordian Knot In England, debates from the Rushdie affair to local politics and school issues have raged. Muslims have demanded that Muslim schools be allowed to receive state subvention like that allowed for Catholic and Jewish schools. Some Muslim groups created their own Parliament, to be criticized by others for ‘playing the Western game’ (Esposito, 1992: 234). To my point regarding the progression of anti-Muslim feelings in British society from history, Esposito’s description of the issue as far back as 1992, well before 911, had been simmering in British society. The British press was reporting statements such as those by defense correspondent Clare Hollingworth, who compared Muslim fundamentalism with Nazism, Fascism and in the end, Communism. Even more prophetic, the U.S Oklahoma City bombing of a federal building in the British press was surreptitiously linked to Islam as the work of fanatics, intimating that Britain best be careful and watchful of Muslims of similar intent. (Esposito 1992). A major study, Islamaphobia: A Challenge For Us All, by the Runnymede Commission on British Muslims and Islamaphobia, found the major sources identified ‘were not the uneducated but those sections of society who claim the mantle of secularism, liberalism, and tolerance. They are in the forefront of the fight against racism and against Islam and Muslims at the same time. They preach equality of opportunities for all, yet turn a blind eye to the fact that this society offers only unequal opportunities for Muslims’ (Esposito, 1992, qtg. Islamaphobia: A Challenge for Us All report: 235). While most violent actions in the UK against Muslims are generally contributed to a population of perpetrators who may not know better, we see that the process and practice goes far beyond a simple reactionary habit by ordinary people to new terrorist attacks. This behaviour began with 911 and spreading to the UK and other European communities. For all intents, the prejudicial beliefs long entrenched in these cultures within the basic citizenry are indeed fanned and held close by many on higher levels with access to the media and even academia. Britain, not often aligned with its European counterparts, has been bolstered in its islamaphobianism with Germany and France, the latter of whom has lately passed restrictive laws against such practices as the wearing of the headscarf in public places as against its constitutionally philosophy of le cite. As in Britain, Islamaphobia combined with issues of demography and immigration. Calls for the expulsion of foreign workers were accompanied by celebrated cases in which Muslim girls in schools and universities were prohibited from wearing a head scarf (hejab) in school. The hejab issue "exemplifies the widening gulf between French society and its Muslim minority. Nearly thirteen centuries after Charles Martel halted the Muslim conquest of Europe at this city, the new battle of Poitiers encapsulates the growing suspicion of--and sometimes hostility to--the Islamic faith in Europe. (Esposito, 1992: 236) In Britain the same may be forthcoming regarding the Crusades and the battles of its own heroes against the infidels. How long it will be before Britain, in its worries over Islamic ‘infiltration’ , will institute similar rules remains to be seen. Conclusion Giles Fraser’s 22 January, 2011 article in The Guardian is perhaps worth noting here as a current indication of where the UK stands at the moment when it comes to facing the reality of its islamaphobia. Fraser, in quoting speaker Lady Warsi, suggests that Britain still has a serious blind spot when it comes to the problem. Fraser writes, ‘The problem Warsi identifies is the problem of slippage. What can begin as a perfectly legitimate conversation about, say, religious belief and human rights can drift into a license for observations that in any other circumstance would be regarded as tantamount to racism. Like the 19th-century link between anti-Catholicism and racism towards the Irish, one can easily bleed into the other’. An anonymous response to Warsi’s speech is signficant in this respect. ‘I treat the Islamic religion with the same respect as the bubble-gum I scrape off my shoe…’ Ironically, the speech and the retort appeared on the website of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. Even to the casual observer, the substance of the response contained neither. Islamaphobia in Britain is indeed an unarguable reality. While some may justify certain activities as legitimately precautionary in light of terrorist attacks perpetrated by some Islamic persons legitimately perceived as fanatics, to assume that every person of a particular religion may fit this identity defies reason and, from a legal and social perspective, the law. As a nation, Britain must face this issue in the interests of reason and fairness. References Dunkin, T. (2010). Ten Myths About Islam, 5th ed. Available at: http://www.studytoanswer.net/islam_myths.html (Accessed 2 May 2011). Feffer J. (2010) “The Lies of Islamaphobia”. Islamaphobia Today [Online] http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/2010/11/09/the-lies-of-islamophobia/ (Accessed 25 April 2011). Jawad, H. and Benn, T. (2004). Muslim Women in the United Kingdom and Beyond: Experiences and Images. Boston: Brill. Githens-Mazer, J. (2011) ‘The British Prime Minister Has Laid Out An Approach to Terrorism Based on Emotion Rather than Evidence’. Aljazeera [Online]. Available at: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201128114625731221.html (Accessed 2 May 2011). Lambert, R. and Githens-Mazer, J. (2010). Islamaphobia and Anit-Muslim Hate Crime: UK Case Studies, 2010). http://centres.exeter.ac.uk/emrc/publications/IAMHC_revised_11Feb11.pdf (Accessed 1 May 2011). Merali A. and Shadjareh M. (2002). ‘Islamaphobia: The New Crusade’. Great Britain: Islamic Human Rights Commission. Available on: http://www.ihrc.org.uk/attachments/7551_ISLAMOPHOBIAthenewcrusade.pdf (Accessed 22 April 2011). Read More