Jesus, wept, I really don’t think there is any parallel with the experience of blacks in the USA.
I’d respectfully suggest you are not well informed.
This reads like Monty Python line.: No! no! Not the … FROWN!!
This to me was the paragraph that was most relevant; quote from Nomani. Hopefully I am not violating board rules with such a large block of copy&paste.
Thank you for your important work in the community. The tightrope that you walk is one that too many people today have internalized because of a very strategic campaign by Islamist governments, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to attack anyone who criticizes their ultra-orthodox Islamist interpretations of Islam. We call this network the “honor brigade.” Just as you are vigilant about “Islamophobic fundamentalist Christian terrorists,” we must safeguard against fundamentalist Muslim terrorists, for the sake of human rights and women’s rights, L.G.B.T.Q. rights and other basic principles of human dignity. As you likely know, Muslims around the world — and others, of course, too — face “violent havoc” from Islamic extremism. We have to speak bluntly about the threat of Islamist interpretation to defeat it.
Thank you for this analysis. But two questions.
-
Why do Muslims think Nawaz or Ali aren’t speaking to them? They both were raised Muslim, and Nawaz still identifies as Muslim.
-
Regarding your last paragraph, I think that is a very interesting dilemma. If this problem exists and we acknowledge it, what can we do about it? Maybe nothing. Maybe it’s really not a problem if people hold extremist views (as long as they don’t get violent) and live in parallel societies.
Putting the extremism aside, I guess my main concern with this system is that the children don’t get exposed to as many things as non-Muslim British children do. The girls may not be allowed to participate in sports, or go on field trips with the class, etc.
But in the US we allow parents a pretty free hand when it comes to raising their children by the tenets of their religion–we would definitely let anyone in this country pull a child from PE or refuse to give permission for a field trip. Is that the right attitude? Should we focus on extremist Christian homeschoolers and Haredi Jews in our own country first? I don’t know.
I deliberately used a lot of qualifiers because I wanted to couch my discussion in language that is as politic as possible. Is there data to show how many Muslims in the UK hold extremist beliefs? I’ll go hunting.
Of note, I would point out that the second generation of Muslim immigrants (born/raised in UK) seem to have more resistance to assimilation and more extremist beliefs than their parents.
Silver lining, I would just like to point out that “sharia law” can mean many different things to many different people, and not all of the manifestations are as cruel as the ones you mention. From my understanding, the UK sharia courts are more like arbitrators than bona fide courts of law.
Yes
A very quick search brought up the following, in regards to the prevalence of this issue:
(Disclaimers 1) I did not read the actual study, just the summary 2) It seems to be a right-leaning publication, judging by the websites sidebar, there is no link to the actual study itself, it may be the same as the study below
The following is another survey which was conducted by a “center right” (according to business insider) institution: Policy Exchange Poll of Muslim Attitudes and Beliefs on Who Planned 9/11 - Business Insider
I do not know the methodologies of these surveys and cannot vouch for the validity of the results.
So then, all of these are minority positions among UK Muslims.
15% of American Christians believe the Earth was created whole less than 10,000 years ago.
Yeah but these are large minorities . . . These don’t appear to be “fringe” values.
This is the nonsense promoted by Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, the English Defense League, etc. It is not true.
Recent Pakistani immigrants to Britain have, indeed, assimilated more slowly than some others. There are a number of reasons for this: a primarily agricultural community immigrating to an industrialized country, a community that is a bit more clannish than Western society, and a more active persecution of the group. These very closely echo the problems that have impeded the assimilation of the Romani in Europe and blacks in the U.S.
However, a blanket claim that “Islam” is the problem is without foundation as demonstrated by the assimilation of many Muslims across Europe and Muslims who are not among the Pakistani immigrants in Britain.
Similarly, claims that Pakistani immigrants are “inclined” to create a wholly separate society have more to do with Islamophobic xenophobia than an actual examination of the phenomena. The same accusation is hurled against Jews on many occasions. It is an accusation that has only recently begun to stop being leveled at blacks in the U.S.–an accusation that generally tried to ignore Jim Crow and housing red-lining (and open hostility) that prevented blacks from migrating out of their communities in order to assimilate with the larger society.
Generally no “immigrant based minority group” fits in “with the cultural values of the nation it immigrates to.” (See the Ben Franklin rants against Germans from around 1750.) Falsely blaming the immigrants by claiming that they don’t want to assimilate is also one of the standard claims of anti-immigrant rhetoric.
I make no claim that there are no problems with cultural clashes resulting from immigration. I do note that the same discomfort and fear resulting in the same, tired, accusations, occurs with every large immigrant wave and close inspection reveals that they are not true.
You have to be kidding.
There are multiple parallels between the treatment (and the results of such treatment), of blacks and immigrants, regardless whether the immigrants were of the same religion as the native country or of a different religion.
Housing discrimination, the creation of ghettos by various laws, job discrimination, selective mistreatment by law enforcement, shunning by the surrounding majority, etc. It is not Human Action demonstrating a lack of being well-informed.
In general I am inclined to agree with you. However, one notable point here is that we have a “control” for our social science population. Indians immigrants to the U.K. are doing better in a number of metrics, including education and income. Hindu Indians do somewhat better than Muslim Indians.
Broadly, Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis share a similar culture (although there are a lot of differences as well)–they shared a country until a few decades ago and there are still lots of similarities in terms of dress, language, cuisine, etc. The main difference is religion.
Of course this is hardly “proof” that the issue is religion–maybe the Indians who immigrate are better educated or had broader social networks, I’m sure the bias against Muslims in hiring isn’t helping. But it is a data point.
I am on my phone so can’t link to studies right now but am happy to do so later if anyone wants
Housing discrimination - what are you talking about? Ghettos by virtue of “various” laws? “Shunned”?
I wonder if the problem is you think the whole world is as backward, as culturally racist, as institutionally racist, as is the US; that you measure the world by your own parochial experience?
When was the last time you visited the UK?
I’m not sure why you are alighting on “recent” Pakistani immigration - unless the Internet led you to Rochdale and other similar towns where particular issues arose concerning vulnerable young women and first generation immigrants.
You seem to be conflating and confusing too much.
Sorry Inbred, I know this is the second time I’m quoting this post but I wanted to once again speak about your point #2. One of the reasons I became so interested in this topic is because a dear friend of mine, more like a sister honestly, is a fairly religious Muslim. She is also one of the most liberal people I know; liberal here can mean having left-wing value or appreciating the inalienable rights and freedoms of individuals–both definitions apply to her. She thinks gay people and women should have the same rights as everyone else, she thinks that every religion is true as long as its followers are compassionate and loving. She and her husband make it a point to live in mixed-income housing (although they could afford not to) and in general work very hard to improve the status of marginalized people in our society.
She also gets quite defensive when other people criticize Islam. I asked her why she didn’t like Maajid Nawaz, and she said the following:
- Her community didn’t like him
- Right-wing institutions (e.g. Fox News) liked him
- She got a general sense of Islamophobia from reading some of his work.
But she wasn’t able to give me anything more concrete than that.
Similarly, I was looking for reactions of various Muslim groups to these criticisms.
I found this article: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/casey-report-rejected-many-being-one-sideddivisive-1503291563
in which Islamic leaders decried the report because it did not mention the failure of British society to help with integration (and there is some data showing significant bias against Muslims in hiring and in news reporting).
But I feel like I never hear Muslim spokespeople say anything like, "Yes, this is a problem in our community, and we are going to look for opportunities to improve this situation, both within and outside of our communities.
Maybe these statements are there; if anyone has some I would be very interested in reading them.
Also, I will say that there is no doubt at all in my mind that self-promotion is a huge motivator for nawaz, and it seems that he has exaggerated or falsified elements of his story. However, I don’t think that means that his message can’t be useful.
Do you have an actual point, here?
When discussing the issues that arise with cultural conflicts related to immigration, I noted that there was a parallel to the black experience in the U.S.
You denied that without providing any substantive rebuttal. The U.S. clearly created ghettos, using various laws (some Federal, some state based, and some local), to limit the places where blacks might live. Jacob Vigdor has, in a couple of studies of Europe, noted that restrictive laws on home ownership by non-citizens plays an important role in preventing immigrants from leaving the rental units where they first landed, denying them home ownership and mobility. Now it is quite possible that Britain is not among the nations that have those restrictive laws. In that case, I am in error regarding the role that laws have played in creating ghettos in Britain. That, however, is different from your simple dismissal when you have not even attempted to understand the point being made.
On the other hand, Britain is included among the countries that are guilty of directing students into programs that will provide the least economic benefit to students who are already poor, and recent immigrants are going to make up a very high proportion of such students. (Britain is not as bad as Germany, but it still has problems.)
As for shunning, the UK demonstrates the same sort of employment practices as the U.S. in which recognizably “other” people are hired at much lower rates than people of similar educational attainment who are not clearly “other.”
I certainly do not regard the U.S. as culturally superior to any other nation when viewing racist behavior, but the EDL is hardly withering away in Britain and a significant amount of the Brexit ad campaigns were directly xenophobic, making your attempt to dismiss my remarks because I come from a racist country silly, at best.
It is always best to read what the person themselves say rather than second-hand criticism from those who prejudge according to what they think they have said.
Here are a summary of his views, I’ve never found his public work departing too much from these. Hardly a rabid right-wing or neo-con in waiting. In fact he has run as a Liberal-Democrat candidate in UK elections, they don’t come any more centrist than that. Moderate and sober, respectful and protective of islam and muslims but critical of any hint of extremism or the fascist tendencies of the ultra-religious. More voices like his are needed from within all faiths.
You don’t have to be that old. You just have to live in certain red states (and probably a few blue ones too).
And American evangelicals have been working with anti-gay groups and governments in Africa and Eastern Europe to implement severe penalties for being homosexual including long imprisonments (although implementation of the death penalty in Uganda was headed off, fortunately). In Georgia (the country) there have been mobs led by the leaders of the Orthodox Church attacking (including stoning) homosexuals. Russia has been engaged in a government-led pogram against homosexuals for years at the behest of Vladimir Putin with the support of the Church. And that’s not even getting into some of the worst religion-driven excesses going on in other parts of Africa. So let’s not handwave away Christian behaviors here.
Yes, the vast majority of Christians in the world are decent people who just want to get on with their lives in peace. But so are the vast majority of Muslims. Attempting to tar over a billion people with the sins of the worst of them does neither them nor you any service.
Have you got data for that? You seem to be making a lot of assertions without actual data.
Sorry, I should have made it clear–I have read several of maajid nawaz’s pieces, including his autobiography. Which is why I was flummoxed when my friend professed to dislike him.
Yes, I have been deliberately not providing cites as I stated in my first post, but will give cites when asked.
In this case, it seems I overstated my claim. In terms of primary sources, this is the best that I could find:
which notes that youth is a risk factor for radical beliefs.
and this: http://www.portmir.org.uk/assets/pdfs/second-and-third-generation-muslims-in-britain-a-socially-excluded-group.pdf (warning pdf)
which states this:
without giving any primary sources for that particular statement
I suspect the whole idea that second generation pakistanis are less integrated and more radicalized than the first generation is a comment in an article I read somewhere without any data to back it up, so I’m willing to let the integration aspect of it drop. Although there does seem to be evidence that radicalization (which I admit is different from extremist beliefs, which was the phrasing I used) is more common in young people than in older people.
While digging around to find a cite for gyrate, I did also find this:
https://www.econ.nyu.edu/user/bisina/JEEA.BPVZ.pdf (warning PDF), a summary of which can be found here:
http://voxeu.org/article/muslim-immigrants-integration-uk
noting that there are significant differences between muslim and non-muslim immigrants.
The authors do note that many limitations in their study (one being that the data only goes through the 1990s) and do recommend caution when drawing conclusions from this information given those limitations.
The opening paragraphs of that report indicate a problem from the get go. They refer to the Paris riots of 2005 in terms of “Muslim” participation. However, as noted and documented on the SDMB at that time, few of the participants in those riots had any attachment to Islam and the Muslim authorities both decried the violence and disavowed the connection. The origins of those riots was the treatment of second generation immigrants who had already fallen away from their faith, but continued to suffer discrimination because of their perceived heritage. In other words, it was the larger society’s persecution that radicalized those youth.
As to the perception that Muslims differ from others in clinging to their religion, I would note that the study’s surveys very much mirror surveys of Catholics in the U.S. up until Catholics became presidents of the U.S. and General Motors, signalling that they had finally been accepted in the U.S. as fellow citizens.
Doug Saunders, in his The Myth of the Muslim Tide: Do Immigrants Threaten the West? provides a clear analysis of the xenophobia regarding the treatment of Muslim immigrants along with the parallels to the histories of other immigrant groups, debunking the nonsense of Geller and her cohorts.
I also note that the linked survey, itself, explicitly limits itself to religious beliefs, not those of citizenship.
I think the institutional opposition to scary beliefs held by Muslims, or anybody for that matter, is already in place. It’s covered.
I don’t know, why don’t you ask Muslims? Personally, I wouldn’t think too well of a person who criticized something I believed in while being caught in a huge number of lies concerning their experiences with the thing I believed in.
Unfortunately, there’s nothing we can do about it. Sorry. Free people are free to have thoughts we find repugnant. Darn.
I find her reasons to be extremely concrete. I would be offended as your friend to find out you had said that about her list of reasons.
Yup trust is a two-way street.
It amazes me there are people so obsessed with the notion that Muslims need to be more willing to have their way of life criticized. What an extraordinary waste of time and energy.
What on earth are you saying here? What institution? what opposition? are you talking about legal sanctions? Are you suggesting that we should not criticise bad ideas at all?
Also, I’m confused about your criticism of Maajid Nawaz. Are you saying he’s lied?
Strong claims. What are his lies and how do they affect the validity of what he says?
I linked to his list of views above,here they are again.
Can you quote me from there (or anywhere) the views that you disagree with or have a problem with? or that are invalidated by other “lies” that he has told (if any)