Posts
In case anybody hasn't noticed, hooliganism is now part of the fabric of democracy.
An incident occurred last week in Birmingham, England, that gained little notice outside the UK but sent shockwaves through some British communities. Dozens of people were arrested last weekend following a protest by followers of the English Defence League against the implementation against Sharia in the United Kingdom.
The reality is the protest against Sharia was nothing more than an anti-Islamic grievance beer party that started at a neighborhood pub and ended violently when a group of Muslims confronted the protesters. Rocks, sticks and punches were thrown with the police blaming both the EDL and Muslims youths for the ruckus.
Lost in all the haze is the fact that most Muslims, British-born or not, have given little thought about whether Sharia belongs in the UK. The tiff in Birmingham was a result of the young Muslims recognizing the protest for what it was: a movement against the Muslim community, and not because Sharia was supplanting British law.
How is this political hooliganism?
While British MPs are dithering over expense accounts, the fringe elements outside the political process have become mainstream. Last June, the British National Party garnered more than 6 percent of the vote in European elections, including two seats in the Brussels parliament. Not only does the BNP have a voice in government, but it has its militia in the streets.
While the Liberal Democrats and Tories think it's fine to engage the BNP in debate, they are making the mistake in believing that logic and common sense will prevail in the political arena. They are faced with such organizations as the Stop Islamification of Europe (SIOE) that argues that "Islamophobia is the height of common sense." Just how do the Liberal Democrats and Tories think they are going to win the war of words with that kind of rationale?
I must admit, though, the Labour Party's policy of ignoring the BNP is probably more ridiculous. Doing nothing in the face of seething unrest among some British citizens who see merit in the BNP and EDL is a recipe for disaster.
The problem lies in the unchecked behavior of the BNP, EDL, SIOE and their followers. Political debate legitimizes fringe groups. It allows these groups to obscure racism and xenophobia with phony arguments of UK border security while the real work is performed in the street. Few people are going to pay attention to Liberal Democrats arguing border security with the BNP when hooligans know the best arguments are made with BBC footage of Britons "defending" the streets of Birmingham with their fists.
This Friday, the anniversary of 9/11, anti-Islamic protests are scheduled to be held by the SIOE at the new Harrow central mosque in London. Muslim supporters, calling themselves Unite Against Fascism, also plan to be there. The mosque is not finished, but Friday prayers will be conducted next door in the middle of Ramadan, Islam's holiest month. Imagine, if you will, the specter of a massive demonstration with the threat of violence outside a London church during Christmas Day services. Same thing. In this case, Muslims are faced with the threat of violence during a period of fasting and prayer.
Ghulam Rabbani, the general secretary of the Harrow mosque, told The Times of London last week that he doesn't know why protesters picked his mosque.
"We don't know why they are singling us out. They say we are planning a Sharia court but we have never had such a plan. This community is mixed with Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Jews. We have had very good relations for 25 years."
Members of the BNP, SIOE and EDL have the right to freely express their views in a peaceful manner. But let's not forget that by embracing their legitimacy in the political process, we are also legitimizing their followers in the street. It's not about Sharia because its implementation in the UK doesn't exist. The Sharia argument is a smokescreen for the true anti-immigrant agenda.
The irony is that this Friday's scheduled protest is planned by extremists: SIOE and the Unite Against Fascism group. In the middle are the Harrow Muslims who just want everybody to go away.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Racism or any form of discrimination whether based on gender or religion ideally has no place in any society, and neither do violent protests nor violent responses to non-violent protests. The likes of the BNP are one of the worst representations of what would appear to be a mounting trend across Europe.
To group Stop The Islamification of Europe with them, however, seems to be adding to the "haze" you talk about, as they – it would appear at least and I haven't yet come across any evidence to suggest otherwise – profess an anti-racist and anti-discrimination stance, and their agenda is against Shariah Law.
Some of that haze is evident here when you say: "…a result of the young Muslims recognizing the protest for what it was: a movement against the Muslim community, and not because Sharia was supplanting British law" – are you saying that it was an attack on the community's religious affiliation or are you trying to say that Muslims are a race?
A more fundamental point here is, would such a protest be acceptable to you if there were genuine concerns about the introduction of Shariah Law into Britain, which I believe the Arch. Bish. Of Canterbury described as "inevitable"? An answer to this question is hugely important from the "Muslim community" you mention.
"It's not about Sharia because its implementation in the UK doesn't exist. The Sharia argument is a smokescreen for the true anti-immigrant agenda." Some would argue that Shariah is on its way, and want to stop it.
Britain already has special laws for Muslims, such as being able to have two wives provided for by the welfare state – which discriminates not just against non-Muslims but also against women and Muslim women, who of course, are not allowed to have more than one husband. There are hundreds – hundreds! – of public swimming pools in London that have held "Muslim Only" swimming times. Birmingham itself has a "special community police force" of Muslims, who actively and have on occasion violently prevented persons from other religious communities doing what Muslims do everywhere in terms of proselytizing etc and so on. The most serious concern however is that of free speech and the general self-censorship in the face of extremely violent threats and the carrying out of these threats to non-Muslims across the globe when some non-Muslim, somewhere on the globe, draws a cartoon, makes a film, writes an article or book etc and so on. Even if some non-Muslim simply repeats the words of Muslims themselves, he can be banned from entering Britain, as in the case of Gert Wilders and his film Fitna.
These I feel are legitimate concerns. But one should be wary of tarring all those who have those concerns as racist because they are merely opposed to an ideology. There are racists out there, and many of them join anti-Islamist demonstrations out of racist motives, for I suspect very few of them know very much about Islamic beliefs and ideologies at all, and they should rightly be condemned.
I won't, however, paint them as a "tiny minority" who should therefore just be ignored out of fears of painting all white Brits as racist. They are a problem and need to be dealt with, and their disriminatory ideology, like all such ideologies, should be confronted by community and state alike. We cannot just ignore them because they are a minority. That minority would appear to be growing.
"It's not about Sharia because its implementation in the UK doesn't exist. The Sharia argument is a smokescreen for the true anti-immigrant agenda."
A source of complaint in many "Islamic" countries is that Shariah is not correctly or fully implemented. Would it be safe to presume that Muslim leaders in Britain are different to those of many Muslims in the Islaimc world?
"Imagine, if you will, the specter of a massive demonstration with the threat of violence outside a London church during Christmas Day services. Same thing."
NO, it is not the same thing. You should have written: "Imagine, if you will, the specter of a massive demonstration with the threat of violence outside a Riyadh church during Christmas Days services. "
But there are no churches in Riyadh, are they?
Post a Comment