Return to opening page for further information and viewing conditions
.

Integration..still a good thing?

Church sidelined 'by Government favouritism to Muslims'
08.10.06 thisislondon.co.uk

The memo was written by Guy Wilkinson, interfaith advisor to the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams. The Church of England has privately blamed the Government for favouring Islam over other religions, it was revealed today.

A document prepared by the Archbishop of Canterbury's adviser on other faiths accused ministers of showing political preference to Muslims and using taxpayers' money to promote Islam.But, it said, the result has only been to deepen the divisions in society.

And the report questioned why Britain is regarded as a 'multi-faith' society when more than seven out of ten people say they are Christians and only one in 20 follow another faith.

The protests within the Church of England are a further blow to the left-wing doctrine of multiculturalism that denigrates British history and tradition while insisting on the right of every minority group to develop its own culture.

The criticism of Labour's attitude to Muslims was presented to the CofE's bishops last week and is said to have been 'well received.' In it, Dr Rowan Williams' advisor Canon Guy Wilkinson said that the Church of England had been 'sidelined' while 'preferential' treatment was accorded to Muslims.

The report cited a series of instances of bias in favour of Islam. These included public funding to fly Islamic scholars to Britain to preach, the abandonment of laws that would have made forced marriage a crime, and official encouragement for the development non-interest mortgage and loans that obey the letter of Islamic law.

But Canon Wilkinson, who made a reputation as an outspoken cleric in the 1990s while trying to maintain congregations at his inner city Birmingham church in the face of growing Muslim influence in his local area, said all of this had not helped to heal the gulf between some groups of Muslims and the rest of society.

His report said: 'One might argue that disaffection and separation is now greater than ever, with Muslim communities withdrawing further into a sense of victimhood, and other faith communities seriously concerned that the Government has given signals that appear to encourage the notion of a privileged relationship with sections of the Muslim community.' It added: 'In relation to faith, there has been a divided, almost schizophrenic approach.'

The document said that the 'contribution of the Church of England in particular and Christianity in general to the underlying culture remains very substantial. 'It could certainly be argued that there is an agenda behind a claim that a five per cent adherence to other faiths makes for a multi-faith society.'

Canon Wilkinson, who was an archdeacon in Bradford during the 2001 riots, said that Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly's Commission on Cohesion and Integration that is designed to help bring Muslims into the mainstream is doomed to fail.

His report adds to the sense of frustration with multiculturalism within the CofE that was expressed last year by Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu. Dr Sentamu said the doctrine tended to suppress the benefits of majority culture.

A spokesman for the Church of England said: 'This internal briefing note, produced by a Church official, is not designed as an attack on the Government but as a contribution to debate.'

Dalai Lama warns against talk of 'clash of civilisations' 
 zeenews.com, Oct 09 2006

The Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, has warned against portraying Islam as a religion of violence, saying Muslims have been wrongly demonised in the West since the September 11 attacks.

Promoting religious tolerance, the world's most influential Buddhist leader said on Sunday that talk of "a clash of civilisations between the West and Muslim world is wrong and dangerous."

Muslim terrorist attacks have distorted people's views of Islam, making them believe it is an extremist faith rather than one based on compassion, the Dalai Lama told a press conference in New Delhi.

Muslims are being unfairly stigmatised as a result of violence by "some mischievous people," said the Dalai Lama, who received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 for his work to bring democracy and freedom to his people.

All religions have extremists and "it is wrong to generalise (about Muslims)," the 71-year-old spiritual leader said. "They (terrorists) cannot represent the whole system," he said.

The Dalai Lama, who has lived in Dharamsala since fleeing Tibet after a failed uprising against Chinese rule in 1959, said he had cast himself in the role of defender of Islam because he wanted to reshape people's views of the religion.

Asked about the uproar last month when Pope Benedict XVI quoted a 14th-century Christian emperor to portray Islam as a religion tainted by violence, the Dalai Lama said "if you return to past history there are a lot of complications." "It is better to forget ... and to deal with today's reality," he said. "Past history is (full of) uncivilised events," he said.

Benedict had quoted statements by Emperor Manuel II -- ruling from what is now Istanbul -- that everything the Prophet Mohammed had brought was evil and that he spread Islam by violence. The pontiff later apologised for the comments which triggered angry reactions around the world from Muslims who said the pope's statements harked back to the medieval Christian crusades against Islam.

The Dalai Lama noted the "conflict and divisions caused in the name of religion," referring to violence in such places as Ireland, Pakistan and Iraq. But despite that "religion has great potential to help humanity on the basis of mutual respect," he said. 

Multiculturalism hasn't worked: let's rediscover Britishness
By Patience Wheatcroft, 08/10/2006

The tyranny of political correctness has for years suppressed the qualms that many Britons have had about what was happening to their country. Radical imams were allowed to preach hatred while being funded with state benefits, but few dared to question such madness, let alone act against it. The doctrine of multiculturalism dictated that all beliefs should be allowed to flourish, and to challenge that view was as politically incorrect as pinning up a Pirelli calendar in Islington Town Hall or suggesting that two married parents usually provide the best start in life for a child.

Gradually, however, people are gaining the courage to defy the diktats of political correctness and to question the assumptions of what should be acceptable in Britain today. In Bournemouth last week, David Cameron admitted to feeling uncomfortable about the segregation that now exists in many cities, where people remain isolated in ethnic communities. Jack Straw has publicly raised the veil on an issue that, privately, many will have admitted to finding disturbing. And even the Church of England, it seems, may be rediscovering sufficient backbone to assert the importance of its role as the predominant faith in the country.

Multiculturalism, as an increasing band of influential voices is prepared to say, has not worked. Both Labour and Conservative politicians have now stressed the need for all immigrants to learn English, but merely speaking the language is not enough. For the country to feel comfortable, there needs to be a sense of cohesion. That is unlikely to be achieved by the Commission on Cohesion and Integration set up by Ruth Kelly, the Secretary of State for Communities. The omission of any representative of the Church of England on the 14-strong Commission, which includes the secretary-general of the Hindu Forum of Great Britain, indicates that it may be starting from the wrong place. To start from the right place requires a degree of confidence in core British ideals. That does not mean harking back to John Major's Hovis-style vision of bicycling delivery boys doffing their caps to village worthies. But we should reassert Britain's claim to be a country that believes in tolerance, politeness and compassion, and one in which, even if the church-going habit has faded, Christian values prevail.
 
No, Jack Straw is not islamophobic! The veil excludes women from society       
 Franck Biancheri.  newropeans-magazine.org, 09 October 2006 

 If the war on Iraq was the worst idea ever to establish peace and democracy, the niqab (large veil covering the face too) is definitely the worst mean to integrate Muslim women into Western European societies.

And if it is indeed unfortunate that Jack Straw did not dare denounce the first lie (about the war on Iraq), it does not mean that he should not been supported for telling now a useful truth to British society: the niqab indeed prevents women’s integration (and simultaneously increases xenophobic feelings among mainstream population by making those women and their beliefs even more alien to the society they live into).
 
From Germany to France, Jack Straw’s finding is already a well known fact and has been handled with no serious difficulty. The main reason is that besides a few extremists, Muslim women do not dream of being 'jailed' within their own clothes.
 
The question now for UK is to know whether it will be able to get out of the intellectual ghetto where political correctness has trapped it for at least one decade and which can be summarized this way:
  • a good leftist mindset should be: pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli, pro-multiculturalism, pro-minority (whatever they are or ask for), anti-American and a bit pro-European
  • a good rightist mindset should be : pro-Israeli, anti-terrorist (especially from Muslim origin), pro-multiculturalism, pro-minority but nationalist too (understands who can), Americanist and very much anti-European.
The problem is that British society is moving in a complete different direction. Its 'multiculturalism' is in pieces (if it ever existed) as shown by all recent surveys (1) indicating that the British Muslim population shares the same convictions regarding Western values as Muslim populations from the Middle East (while on continental Europe they share the same opinions as the people of their own country, the European country they live into).
 
British elites are totally colonized by US interests and values; and since the Iraq war, the country has lost any international visibility worldwide, being now taken for a mere subsidiary of Washington Inc. Britishness is becoming a key asset for xenophobic political movements which are getting an increasing popular support. And the negative fallout of the Iraq war, together with Blair’s belief that there is such a thing as a ‘war on terror’, obliges British authorities to constantly use double standards speeches: pretending to be very opened to Islam whatever form it takes, while pursuing a very aggressive anti Muslim activists policy.

Such a context does not help to generate a productive intellectual environment to deal with the Muslim veil complex issue as it lacks a constructive debate on the issue. For Newropeans, in line with its recently adopted proposal regarding Immigration, each EU Member state has to find its own balance between its tradition in matter of relations between religious and public behaviours, and the immigrants’ religious traditions. But it has to be a policy aimed at integrating the immigrants, and especially their children. Therefore all factors whose effects are to discriminate or to separate the immigrants and their children from mainstream population have to be forcefully opposed. UK is not France, nor Germany. It has to find its own way to deal with the veil issue. One lesson though: in places where the policy starts at school, when people are young, it definitely increases the chances to limit in the future the problem with adults!

In anyway, Jack Straw has brought the UK debate on that issue closer to the continental one. And UK elites could be well inspired to look at other European experiences in that field rather than at US ones, because whatever they may believe, they belong to a European society fabric, where there is no ‘free space’ available (contrarily to the USA) to let immigrants develop their own way of life.

I always remind my audiences when such questions are raised, that within Europe, our history teaches us one terrible lesson: we have inside our own European civilisation dark forces, nurtured by the fear and hatred of the ‘Other’, which are always sleeping just beneath the surface of our ‘open societies’. The most efficient way to wake them up is to ignore them and pretend that we are ‘angels’.

As Pascal once wrote, ‘who wants to be the angel becomes the beast’(2). Though it is a French philosopher’s opinion, I do believe that it is a sentence which British opinion leaders could right now usefully meditate upon.

Notes
[1] Read for instance this very interesting survey from the Pew Research Center :  ‘Muslims in Europe: Economic Worries Top Concerns About Religious and Cultural Identity’ (07/06/06)
It namely underlines that ‘Muslims in Great Britain, however, are the most likely of all groups sampled to see a strengthening of Islamic identity with fully 77% agreeing.’

[2] With this sentence, Pascal also provides us with a crystal-clear anticipation of the long-term effects of ‘political correctness’.
 
See also
Multiculturalism
The key to successful integration
Globalization isn't working

meditations
top