Yesterday the Guardian newspaper published its 2nd annual report on British Muslims. But before I get to the travesty that is the Guardian’s woeful attempt at a representative view of one of Britain’s ethnic minorities I want to take issue with columnist Madeleine Bunting. In a complimentary piece to the Guardian report, Bunting wrote:

These particular Muslim predicaments are underscored by a problem endemic in British political culture – a weak tradition of citizenship. In place of a powerful concept of citizen’s rights and responsibilities, we are still subjects of a hereditary monarchy. We use nationalism not citizenship to generate a sense of belonging and entitlement; that disables an immigrant minority.

And this is where [Francophone Muslim academic Tariq] Ramadan’s move to the UK could be so important. Steeped in a French republican tradition of strong citizenship, he is remarkably challenging of his Muslim audiences…

A weak tradition of citizenship? A disabled immigrant minority? As a third-generation Jewish immigrant to Britain (now living in the US) I can safely say that I have a strong sense of citizenship that has very little to do with monarchy and nationalism and a lot to do with being BRITISH.

One of the perks of being an immigrant to Britain (or of being their descendants) is that you can maintain your own identity at the same time as feeling a part of your adopted country. You can be Jewish and British. Chinese and British. Dare I say it, Muslim and British.

“English” on the other hand is a lot harder to attain. Despite the title of this weblog I have never really considered myself English. I leave that those friends of mine who can trace their English descendants back hundreds of years (unlike my ancestors who come from a long line of shtetls and towns in Poland, Ukraine and Russia).

Is Madeleine suggesting that France, which has just endured weeks of rioting in its predominantly Muslim suburbs, is the way forward? American bloggers’ characterization of the riots as a Muslim intifada was simplistic at best and vicious at worst. But Islam and immigration undoubtedly played a significant part. And two of the reasons for the violence that came over most strongly were France’s inability to absorb to its immigrant population and its lack of space for anything that was not French.

But on to the main show, where the Guardian proudly presents Islamic Voice of Reason Speaks Out, But The Anger Remains:

Last week the Guardian brought together a diverse group of young Muslims to debate life after the London bombs. Two moods emerged: a desire to address extremism in their midst, and disaffection with British foreign policy.
Islamic voice of reason speaks out, but the anger remains. Guardian Newspaper.

Or as Sunny of Pickled Politics more accurately puts it:

The group was not reflective of young British Muslims. This was a middle-class, socially conservative group that was passionate about political Islam. And it was full of Pakistanis, with only a few African Muslims and Bangladeshis. Ordinary Muslims not too obsessed by religion were not to be found either. In other words treat these words as those of a significant, but vocal (and educated) minority.
The Guardian (and me) on British Muslims after 7/7. Sunny of Pickled Politics.

The article itself never really gets to the heart of the debate—how British Muslims can engage with the system rather than being forced to the outside of it. Instead the story sticks to the usual attacks on Tony Blair’s foreign policy, some good comments about tackling extremism and ends with the ridiculous contention that Muslims are made to feel like outsiders in Britain because they cannot join in the country’s pub culture:

Professionally, Muslims have found themselves excluded from alcohol-lubricated networking. “At work, when they choose to go to the pub, you’re being excluded,” said Khadija El Shayyal.

“You’re being stopped from integrating,” Maha Sardar, an entrepreneur, said: “When I went to the bar to train as a barrister I had to go 12 dinners and they were all about alcohol. It’s an archaic cultural thing. I felt very isolated but to qualify as a barrister, I had to attend all 12.”

This seems ridiculous to me. While I admit that alcohol is a huge part of British culture, abstaining from alcohol does not preclude people from going to the pub or from attending dinners…it’s what J2O was invented for. Although Madeleine Bunting (for it is her, writing in that accompanying article) would beg to differ:

…non-Muslim Britain hasn’t begun to grasp how big an obstacle alcohol is to Muslims’ participation. As alcohol consumption has soared in the past two decades, Muslims have been left to negotiate its centrality in British social life – at work, school or university, or as neighbours – with great difficulty. Alcohol is probably now one of the most effective and unquestioned forms of exclusion practised in the UK, affecting every kind of social network.

I don’t remember ever using the word poppycock before but I’m using it now. Poppycock! The idea that Britain’s culture of drinking is alienating the Muslim community has to be one of the most ludicrous excuses I have ever heard for why an immigrant community or ethnic group is struggling to integrate. Whatever next? Full English breakfasts alienating Muslims and Jews? Playing fields and sports stadiums alienating people with agoraphobia?

The crowning turd of Bunting’s piece lies further on in these two paragraphs which deserve a post of their own but will have to suffice WITH MY CHANGES IN CAPS:

That disillusionment is fed by specific Muslim [AND MINORITY] dilemmas; for starters, in a democracy the political priorities of a minority, however passionately held, will never make much headway [THAT IS ONE OF THE UNDER APPRECIATED BENEFITS OF A TOTALITARIAN REGIME]. The welfare of Chechnya and Kashmir [AND DARFUR AND ZIMBABWE], even Palestine, is never going to be the guiding principle of British foreign policy [WHICH TRIES MORE THAN MOST COUNTRIES TO EXERT SOME KIND OF INFLUENCE IN ALL OF THESE PLACES I HAVE JUST MENTIONED]. Plus there is an awkward alignment between key Muslim concerns and the traditions of all three main parties. Many Muslims [OR RELIGIOUS CHRISTIANS OR JEWS] might tend towards the Conservatives on morality issues, [MANY MUSLIMS OR CHRISTIANS OR JEWS MIGHT TEND TOWARDS] Labour on social justice and [MUSLIMS MIGHT TEND TOWARDS THE] Liberal Democrats on foreign policy, while Respect [THE GREEN PARTY, THE COMMUNIST PARTY, THE BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY, AND THE MONSTER RAVING LOONY PARTY] too often seems like a wasted vote.

These are some of the reasons why Hizb ut-Tahrir, with its bizarre [EXTREMIST] ideology advocating an Islamic caliphate [THE KILLING OF JEWS AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL], continues to attract clever, idealistic [FRUSTRATED, DISILLUSIONED] young Muslims. Much like many of their non-Muslim peers [WHO JOIN THE BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY], they think they can’t get their views heard in British politics and democracy doesn’t work. They only differ from their non-Muslim contemporaries in the [RADICAL ISLAMIC] solution they propose.

I’ve said it before and I will say it again. The Guardian is one of my favorite British newspapers. In fact, I think it is my favorite newspaper, which is why I feel so passionately when I see it go to pot like this.

More worryingly, as Sunny points out, the Guardian makes no mention of Hizb ut-Tahrir’s extremist tendencies (despite it’s well-documented problems with trainee journalist Dilpazier Aslam this summer), giving the group a prominent two paragraphs in the first third of the story:

Sultanah Parvin, a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, a group that says voting is a sin, said she was politically active in different ways. “Voting is not going to have all the solutions my parents’ generation believed it would have. There’s a third way to get our voices heard and reach out to a wider society. I’ve been active in what I would classify as political work at grassroots level, talking about drugs, talking about crime, talking about projects which we can get the youth to be involved in rather than acts of violence.”

Arguing that political parties did not have the solutions was not, she stressed, a recipe for segregation or the isolation of the Muslim community. Hizb ut-Tahrir sought dialogue and debate with non-Muslims. “Our position of political activism is not insular. It’s not just talking to the Muslim community,” she said.
Islamic voice of reason speaks out, but the anger remains. Guardian Newspaper.

And here’s Sunny of Pickled Politics on the same subject:

3) I’m annoyed that the Guardian has no mention of the word “extremist” next to Hizb ut-Tahrir. Either way, people at the conference mostly ignored them or did not get riled up about the issues they raised (incitement of hatred legislation).

4) Most Muslims were there about active engagement in British politics and again marginalised HuT on their stance of non-engagement. The consensus was also that Respect was merely a protest vote against the war.
The Guardian (and me) on British Muslims after 7/7. Sunny of Pickled Politics.

On the strength of the Guardian’s and Sunny’s reporting I know who I would rather pay 50p to read. If they had a tip jar, I’d be logging in to Pickled Politics right now…

More Madeleine Madness:
David T picks up the baton and runs with it at Harry’s Place.
Madeleine incurs the wrath of Norm at length here and in brief here and even briefer here.