The slide into a bizarre world of believing conspiracy theories and voicing openly toxic and bigoted views took place slowly over the last decade whilst many of us were not able to fathom how quickly and extensively social media had taken charge of our lives. As the Founder and previous Director of Tell MAMA, which supports victims of anti-Muslim hate, the world that I know of today, as someone reaching his fifties, is virtually unrecognisable to the one in which I worked just a decade ago and where there was real hope that levels of racism, prejudice and intolerance were finally on a downward slope.

Today’s world is also a far cry from that in which I grew up. As a refugee from Amin’s Uganda in 1972, and having fled a second time from Africa in 1983 because of military instability in Kenya, I suffered at first hand the openly racist abuse meted out to Asians and African-Caribbean communities in Kent where I was schooled. Throughout the ’80s and ’90s, that open racism existed, flourished and led to the murder of young black men such as Stephen Lawrence. Such open hatred impacted on many young men and women from BME communities, though the economic boom of that period helped to also temper some of the racist anger and bigotry. Anti-racism work, equality marches and work-based equal opportunity schemes seem to have turned the tide against division that many of us assumed would mean a country more at ease with its diversity.

Whilst the UK is in a far better place than the ’80s, the reality is that, as a country, we have slid backwards towards openly aggressive far-right marches rallying thousands of people, national political instability and a rising sense of mistrust which is acutely felt between BME communities and the two main parties. This, mixed with a recent economic crisis, has created the perfect storm for social insecurity and it is this insecurity that some have played upon in fomenting divisive and openly hostile views toward groups of people in our society. It is also within this environment of insecurity that people have sought comfort within narratives of division that blame others and which provide a sense of meaning to them, however twisted that may be.

For such individuals, conspiracy theories become reality since the world around them is unstable and frightening. Grasping onto something almost tangible, that explains the complexity of life in a simplistic fashion, fills the void that many of us currently feel in an increasingly frightening world. This is why, for example, conspiracy merchants who peddle views of an ‘Islamic takeover’ or of hordes of Muslims outbreeding other communities, manage to find a receptive audience. With less money in people’s pockets, communities aggressively vying for resources in austerity, and a sense of confusion as to where we are heading as a nation, you can see how easy it is for people to believe that there are hidden factors at play. The culprits, in their opinion, are more than likely Muslims, Jews or migrants.

Both Muslims and Jews have felt a sharp rise in hostility towards them and hate crime figures show such a rise over the last five years. Much of this is due to hate online and, furthermore, since 2012, when I founded Tell MAMA, it was clear to me that social media companies would not remove hateful and criminal material, nor would they take down far-right, neo-Nazi or Islamist extremist accounts. Their business model was based on getting traction for their technological revolutions through more accounts opening up. In doing so, they helped create the fog and smoke of disinformation and gave an amplified voice to extremist groups masquerading as ‘free speech’ martyrs. These companies, whilst levelling the playing field for more voices to be heard, also exposed people to views and opinions that would have been marginalised for a reason. Yet their platforms also legitimised toxic views by placing those views into a worldwide market of ideas where extremist groups were better equipped to promote them.

Let me explain. Marginalised, divisive and racist groups by their very nature had to be far more energetic and driven to try to win supporters. Before the advent of social media these people had to host events, print leaflets and remain active at a street level. That all took time and money and, to make it worse, they also looked pretty scary. However, such groups were always driven; they had to be to survive.

Now post their divisive messages on social media with a ‘friendly face’, remove the racist insignia and blame migrants, Muslims and foreigners, and strangely there was a more receptive audience as people’s fears and insecurities rose over the last decade. Additionally, as many of us played catch-up to try to challenge extremist and divisive views, these individuals and groups already had a head start since they were naturally driven and could see the power of the new platforms. It was a toxic, heady mix that was to have a severe impact on our society, as we are now seeing today.

This is why we must mobilise and defend the social values we enjoy in our country, and which are under threat. It is not just those, as this paper has highlighted, who try and divide local communities, who we must challenge; it is also those beyond our shores, who support extremist groups and seek to destabilise our democracy by fomenting instability, whom we must remain vigilant against. If we take our eye off the ball in these crucial years, it is not only our values which may change – it could be our very understanding of reality. Now that truly is frightening.

A growing number of migrants are finding jobs in Germany, according to data released on Tuesday that will give heart to supporters of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to let in hundreds of thousands of war refugees since 2015.

Figures last week also showed that German companies have managed to attract more apprentices to on-the-job training schemes due to a surge in applications from asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Syria.

The figures will feed into a running debate in Germany on the impact of Merkel’s decision in 2015 to open German borders to more than a million migrants, many of them refugees from war zones in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.

Critics including the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party have said the new arrivals will be a burden on Germany’s welfare system and economy.

But the head of Germany’s Labour Office, Detlef Scheele, told dpa news agency there was no reason to be overly pessimistic about the country’s ability to cope with the record number of arrivals.

“This is all going pretty well,” he said, adding that the numbers were slightly better than expected. “These are good numbers, also taking into account that the people came here for humanitarian reasons and not for finding a job,” Scheele added.

The number of employed migrants from the eight countries with the biggest numbers of asylum seekers surged by more than 100,000 to 306,574 in May compared with the same month in the previous year, data from the Labour Office showed.

SKILLED LABOUR SHORTAGE

Among those, roughly three out of four had a labour contract in which the company and the employee were paying full contributions to social insurance schemes, the data showed.

There were roughly 500,000 people from the eight main asylum seeker countries who were registered as looking for work in July, the data showed. This includes people who are currently completing an integration and language course.

Among those, nearly 197,000 people were registered as unemployed which is roughly in line with the level seen a year earlier, the data showed.

Shortages of skilled labour and a lack of young people willing to commit to on-the-job training for up to 3 1/2 years have become big concerns for managers in Europe’s largest economy.

Vacancies for training positions have reached their highest level in more than 20 years with more than a third of companies unable to fill all of their training spots.

The number of new arrivals in Germany has fallen sharply this year, partly due to stricter border controls across Europe as well as tighter asylum rules in Germany and other countries.

]]> 7811 https://www.faith-matters.org/dame-louise-casey-states-integration-not-two-way-street/ Mon, 09 Jan 2017 21:33:18 +0000 https://faith-matters.org/?p=6364

Speaking at the Communities and Local Government Committee today, Dame Louise Casey made the case for the findings of her review into opportunity and integration which took over 14 months to complete.

Speaking with a sense of purpose, Casey suggested that “integration was not a two way street”, and that in fact she saw it much like a motorway moving in a specific direction with smaller feeder routes joining the main motorway. She said that whilst some accommodation needed to be made by drivers in the middle of the road, significant adjustments had to be made by the cars joining the motorway and therefore integration was not a ‘two way street’. This was further explained by her belief that new communities needed basic support in understanding the normative customs of the country and they required basic items of information such as when to put out bins, how to queue and how to be courteous to one another. She made these responses to questions put to her at the Committee by Bethnal Green and Bow MP, Rushnara Ali.

There were a number of areas that also highlighted the difficult nature of the work undertaken by Casey. She highlighted deep generational and gender based divides in faith communities and in particular singled out the Glasgow mosque for issues. She also added that her report had made clear that British Muslim women of Pakistani heritage were significantly disadvantaged and whilst deprivation and other issues played a role, she could not rule out that misogyny and gender based prejudices had held some of these women back. She added,

“My job is to hold a mirror up and report on things, whether some like it or not.”

Another area that came under her spotlight was the issue of conservative religiousity. This she regarded as sometimes being a cover for actions that went against equalities and her comments highlighted her desire to reduce the space for religious conservatism when it impacted on the lives of others within public institutions.

Furthermore, Casey also highlighted how far right and Islamist extremism were areas of threat to integration and cohesion. The latter fed the narratives of the former, though she also stated that whilst local authorities were able to challenge and tackle far right narratives and groups, they were ill-equipped and sometimes unable to speak out against Islamist narratives.

Speaking on her comments, the Director of Faith Matters, Fiyaz Mughal Said:

“Dame Louise Casey’s comments will no doubt, continue to promote debate and discussion on issues of integration and if there is one thing that comes across, it is that a real and tangible integration strategy is needed, instead of the tea, samosa and steel band narrative that has been pushed around for so long.

“What is also a fact, is that Casey and her team worked long and hard taking evidence from hundreds of sources for the review. It cannot simply be dismissed and there are some serious issues that need to be discussed. Gender targeted barriers within some faith institutions, values that are so far from the norm of society and which are dressed up as religious conservatism need to be tackled. Furthermore, we have to seriously listen to her advice on integration being a concept where new and settled communities have to accommodate more to normative values of wider society.

“These are all challenging concepts where work will be required. Like it or not, Casey has brought a much needed debate on integration that no other Government touched. If it helps to ensure gender equality in core faith institutions such as in governance, then I warmly welcome these debates.”

Dame Louise Casey’s long awaited report has highlighted a number of alarming areas and with one predominant feature. That at the heart of Government, a more robust and focussed approach needs to be taken on integration policies which have been previously ticked off by successive Governments by sponsoring interfaith work, as though the ‘tea and samosa’ or photoshoot interfaithers really had any major pull in a fast moving and challenging electronic environment.

So let us look at the core findings of the Casey Review. Having met with 800 members of the public, community groups, front-line workers, academics and politicians, Casey also took over 200 submissions for the Review that had been set up under the Premiership of the Rt. Hon David Cameron MP. This has not been an easy process for her and her team, with a change in the premiership and a new leadership that has probaby wanted to distance itself from the past.

Core Findings

Clustering of Communities

The core findings of the Casey Review are going to make for uncomfortable reading for some. She cites that whilst Britain is becoming more diverse, there are a number of local areas where minority and faith communities are increasing in both segregation and concentration, both at a neighbourhood and at a school level. The report cites that,

“Between 2001 and 2011 in England – the number of wards in which more than 40% of the population were of Pakistani ethnicity grew from 12 to 24 and that the number of wards in which more than 40% of the population were of Indian ethnicity grew from 16 to 20…….In 2011, Blackburn, Birmingham, Burnley and Bradford included wards with between 70% and 85% Muslim populations.”

The report goes onto state that,

“Segregation and ethnic concentrations in schools followed different patterns. In 2015, there were 511 schools acros 43 local authority areas with 50% or more pupils from Pakistani and Bangladeshi ethnic backgrounds….No other single ethnic or faith group has residential concentrations as high as Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi ethnic or Muslim faith groups.”

Immigration

Casey’s whole ethos has been that if communities do not talk about sensitive matters, then extreme groups and those looking to create divides in society will. She is absolutely right on this and whilst immigration is an area that needs to be tackled sensitively and appropriately, Casey highlights the failure in integration policies over successive Governments. She stresses that this Government must take action by supporting greater integration and dialogue and through approaches which are not based on soft interfaith sessions which speak to the ‘converted.’

She talks about “the impact of the unprecedented pace and scale of recent immigration on communities.” With annual net migration figures being over 300,000 and with a ‘churn’ of 1 million people who enter and leave the UK, local perceptions are impacted by the scale of change, Casey argues. She suggests that a ‘level-headed’ discussion has to be had on immigration and recommends that Central Government should support a new programme to help improve community cohesion through local authority area based plans and projects.

Targeted Assistance & Challenging Cultural Practices that Hold Back Women

Casey eloquently makes the case for targeted assistance to ensure that Pakistani and Bangladeshi women have access to English language skills so that they can access the Labour market. Allied to this, she calls on the Government to further re-enforce and bolster core values and that people need to confront misogynistic and patriarchal views, which hold women back. She states that “regressive or harmful practices justified in the name of culture or religion”, must not be tolerated.

She also goes onto state that Hindu and Muslim women are twice more likely than Hindu and Muslim men to not speak English and this creates a strong barrier to the workforce, further holding back these women for the rest of their lives.

Strong on issues of equality, Casey advocates for cultural practices to be challenged where they hold back equality and that both the Government and society need to be more confident and determined in challenging such practices where they come across them.

Perceptions Within Communities and Prevent

Casey’s findings will also challenge some within Muslim communities. She iterates that British Muslims are increasingly identifying with a ‘global Muslim Ummah’ and that regressive, intolerant, less integrated and sometimes more conservative versions of Islam strengthen the intolerant and extreme far right, when events take place. For example, statements on women and LGBT groups given by some imams, have been pounced upon by extremist far right groups as evidence that Muslims are a threat to society, whilst deflecting the fact that both Islamism and far right extremism have strains of intolerance and autocracy about them.

Casey goes onto state that there needs to be honest conversations about these matters which are to be welcome, though detail in this area seems to be missing as to what Government, civil society and other actors can do. Furthermore, such issues have led to rises in anti-Muslim hatred and hate incidents and Casey’s suggestion that British laws and values are the anti-dote to such issues, seem vague and blunt.

What was needed was a more specific detailed framework through which local authorities could build stronger local action plans including this core area of work within them. In fact, this area is one of the key areas that has led to polarisation as extreme far right groups have promoted web-site and social media texts around speeches made by imams and other individuals within Muslim communities.

Safeguards

Casey rightly makes the point that the growth of unregistered schools and home schooling, put the safeguarding of young people at risk and also exposes them to poor education opportunities. She suggests stronger safeguards need to be in place and also supports the continued delivery of the Prevent, (Preventing Extremism), agenda that has been implemented within statutory authorities as part of the Government’s safeguarding agenda.

Casey goes onto vocally support Prevent and suggests that it needs to be more strongly promoted and defended in communities. What Casey does not mention, has been that successive Governments since the Coalition Government, took a laissez-faire approach in defending the Prevent programme and for years left Prevent open to attacks from groups whose sole purpose was to highlight potential flaws, promote a post-factual world around Prevent and state that Prevent was a ‘mass-spying exercise against Muslims’.

For years these narratives were targeted towards Muslims by groups who had no alternative and who rarely talked about the need for the country to be protected by some form of a community based counter-extremism strategy. The latter was never mentioned in debates apart from consistant attacks on Prevent.

Additionally, the slow tortoise like approach from the Government in admitting, acting upon and highighting actions regarding Channel referrals on far right extremists re-enforced for some, the bizarre belief that Prevent was a ‘mass spying exercise against Muslims’. So whilst Casey makes the case for Prevent, some responsibility needs to be taken by the last two Governments in their monumental failure to defend the Prevent and counter-extremism strategy, to the point that within many in Muslim communities, it is seen through an overwhelmingly negative lens.

Summary

Casey’s report highlights structural employment related inequalities, the need to challenge views that undermine equality, greater advocacy for safeguarding measures and the need to build in greater mixing at local community levels through activities and better urban landscaping. She talks about the need to get women trained in English and the need to break down inter-cultural barriers through targeted assistance and classes. She also introduces an ‘Oath of Integration’ with British Values for those who arrive in the UK, as a means of signing up and adhering to a set of British principles.

The real proof of change will be in the desire of this Government to resource, upskill and stand up to challenges against its programmes which support women from Black and Minority Ethnic communities. For far too long, successive Government’s have also been passive in defending their policies and have wavered when supporters from political fringes within them have lobbied and harried the Government. If we are to truly strengthen core values and principles, then there is a time to stand firm, defend good integration projects and make the case for investment within them. Saying this, the Government must stop funding projects that show faith leaders smiling at cameras and where there are no tangible outcomes apart from people of the same views meeting and self-promoting themselves. It must also have clear impact indicators that measure each and every integration project which the Government supports and which are in line with this national review.

Overall, the Casey report is to be welcomed and Casey undertook the work tirelessly and diligently, meeting with over 800 people in this task of work. She was open, probing, highly informed and clear that something needed to be done to kickstart integration work. Integration she felt, had been left to develop a life of its own and had never really happened in parts of our country, a view that we fully subscribe to. Furthermore, Casey felt that core values needed to be protected and defended, something that we wholly agree with. For far too long, we have allowed views that reduce the human rights of people, to be passively and actively promoted without challenge. For far too long, we assumed that the momentum of ‘good’ triumphing over evil, would naturally happen. Sadly, life and the dynamics of life do not work that way. Maintaing integration and cohesion needs solid hard work on an hourly, daily, monthly and annual basis. Without this consistent energy, we open ourselves to the forces of separation, hatred and extremism.

The Louise Casey review of the state of integration within communities in the United Kingdom may well be launched soon and in the coming months. The Government’s Integration Czar, she has taken a measured, yet honest view based on hard evidence of what is impacting on communities in the United Kingdom.

Some of the focus of the report will be on barriers to employment and cultural practices that hold back women from employment. Evidence over the last decade has shown that Pakistani and Bangladeshi women do suffer significant barriers to employment, yet anyone who knows Dame Louise Casey will know that she will not pull any punches on forensically looking at areas that may also be sensitive and she is right in doing so. Cultural and gender identified roles do not have a part to play in modern society and neither should religion be used to hold back the social, mental and emotional development of women within communities.

The review will also look at areas of extremism and immigration and changes at local levels in communities. Casey’s work has extended over a year now and was first initiated by the previous Prime Minister. With decades of experience on working on anti-social behaviour and child safeguarding, she is best placed to have led this work and to have some honest discussions about immigration when the report is launched. Granted these discussions will not be easy, but they have to happen if we are to reduce barriers between communities and to take the oxygen out of extremist groups using this topic to recruit predominantly vulnerable young men.

Extremism

There are findings which will shape how this Government moves ahead on extremism in the future. Islamist groups who continue to build barriers between statutory agencies, including the Government, will be highlighted. The narrative of ‘them and us’ which has gone unchallenged for far too long, may well be highlighted and if so, it is essential so that young people are not fed half-truths and downright lies that the Government ‘spies’ on Muslims because they are Muslims. This simply exacerbates fractures in communities and ensures that Muslims never reach their full earning or social potential as they withdraw into a world of conspiracy theories.

Equally, by looking at issues like immigration, we hope that the Casey review will be able to start a discussion which means that extremist far right groups can have the oxygen on which they fuel their activities, taken away from them.

We need a new momentum in the coming Parliament, one which is realistic around integration and extremism and there are links across these areas. Those who suggest that they are not, are deluding themselves.

What we also need is less of a focus on supporting integration by the ‘kumbaya politics’ of interfaith work that is promoted by some organisations and with pictures and soundbites doing nothing more than feeding the egos of the leaders of some interfaith groups. We need substantive hard discussions if we are to fill the real vaccum that has developed around integration for some communities.

Ercan Karakoyun has long played a prominent role in Berlin’s Turkish community, promoting education and dialogue among Muslims and Germans of other faiths.

Now, however, whenever he can, Karakoyun avoids the bustling streets where many Turks live in the German capital. He says he has received six death threats via email and Facebook that are being investigated by police.

“One message said: ‘We know where your daughter goes to school’,” he added.

Karakoyun heads the Foundation for Dialogue and Education in Germany, a movement that supports Fethullah Gulen, the U.S.-based cleric Turkey blames for July’s attempted coup.

The group has been active in Germany for many years, operating 150 tutoring centres in the country, 30 government-recognised schools and a dozen interfaith dialogue projects. It has long been seen as a moderate Islamic group although it has faced criticism over a lack of transparency.

Now though, tensions are rising among the community of 3 million people with a Turkish background in Germany following the failed putsch. They have split into supporters of Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and his opponents, and they are vying for influence.

The divisions mirror those that are now in stark relief in Turkey between Erdogan’s supporters and two other groups – Gulen backers and ethnic Kurds.

Karakoyun said ties with Erdogan supporters had been strained for several years but the situation had spiralled out of control since the coup was thwarted.

“Erdogan’s witchhunt in Turkey against Gulen supporters is now being carried out here,” Karakoyun said.

The rivalries have raised questions about a failure to better integrate Turks, some of whom have lived in Germany for decades. They have also deepened scepticism in Germany about migrants at a time when Chancellor Angela Merkel is under fire over her open-door refugee policy.

The government has a policy headache. Although concerned about Turkey’s record on human rights and a crackdown on opponents since the failed coup, it needs Ankara’s help to stem the flow of migrants from countries such as Syria.

KURDS PLAN TO MARCH

One immediate concern is a march planned in Cologne on Saturday by leftist groups and Kurds, who account for one in three immigrants from Turkey.

This follows a ban on a large, annual Kurdish festival nearby which angered the Kurds, especially as Erdogan supporters were allowed to hold a rally in Cologne on July 31.

Security officials worry that Erdogan supporters could take to the streets to counter the Kurdish march, expected to attract about 30,000 people, and that there could be violence. Tempers flared when Germany’s top court prevented Erdogan from addressing the July 31 rally via videolink.

With many people of Turkish origin just back from summer holidays in Turkey, there are concerns that passions have been fuelled by media coverage “back home” which is dominated by criticism of Germans, coup plotters and Kurds.

“We cannot allow this conflict to be imported to German soil. We have to pay particular attention to those cases where massive pressure is being applied to Germans with a Turkish background here,” Nicola Beer, general secretary of Germany’s libertarian Free Democratic Party, told Reuters.

Community leaders say a pervasive and longstanding sense among young Turkish Germans that they are shunned in society makes them pliable and more attuned to the political mood in the homeland, to which they feel attached but barely know.

“Because they (young Turks) are ill-informed (about events in Turkey) many get emotional quickly. Some are charged like ticking time bombs,” said Kazim Erdogan, 63, a psychologist who is no relation of Turkey’s president.

“The atmosphere (in the Turkish community in Germany) is completely poisoned. We are at a tipping point.”

Lists of businesses identified as backing Gulen, and calling for boycotts of their products or services, have appeared on social media.

“We are outing these parallel forces and their henchmen!” read one entry, listing over 20 firms in the Stuttgart area, at least one of which denies such links.

Turkish officials say the German government’s concerns about tensions in the Turkish community are overblown and the majority of Turks in Germany have rallied behind Erdogan since the coup.

Sixty percent of Turks in Germany voted for his AKP party in the latest national elections, according to the Organisation of Turkish Communities in Germany.

QUESTIONS ABOUT INTEGRATION

But Labour and Social Affairs Minister Andrea Nahles told Reuters after meeting Turkish groups in Berlin’s Kreuzberg neighbourhood that the situation was “ripping families apart.”

Government officials are worried about the role played by the Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB) which operates through some 900 associations across Germany, most of which are mosques with imams dispatched from Turkey.

“DITIB is used to spread the Turkish government’s message in Germany,” Ole Schroeder, deputy interior minister and a member of Merkel’s conservatives, told Reuters.

Politicians from right and left want DITIB’s influence curbed, and many, including Schroeder, are calling for the group to stop importing clerics who are trained in Istanbul.

DITIB has denied being steered by the Turkish government or posing any threat to Germany.

Merkel has urged Turks in Germany to show “loyalty to our country,” a comment that divided her ruling coalition and pointed to growing angst about strains in the Turkish community and Ankara’s influence on it.

Tensions with Ankara grew when German parliament passed a resolution in June declaring the 1915 massacre of Armenians by Ottoman forces a genocide.

They rose further when a government report in August called Turkey a hub for Islamist groups, and government data show a quarter of the 850 militants who have left Germany to fight for Islamic State had a Turkish background.

Cansel Kiziltepe, a Social Democrat member of the Bundestag lower house of parliament, said the situation showed Germany had not implemented any meaningful integration policies until the early 2000s.

“If people aren’t integrated, then they don’t feel like they belong here,” she told Reuters. “And then they’re susceptible when someone comes (along) who shows apparent strength and tries to incite these people against the majority (in) society.”

After much fanfare, What British Muslims Really Think, aired on Channel 4 last night, hosted by Trevor Phillips.

It promised “an extensive and rigorous survey to get a better understanding of British Muslims’ attitudes to living in Britain and British institutions”; but did it deliver on its promise?

One major problem was the arguments put forward by Trevor Phillips. On several occasions he misrepresented polling data. The first example concerns how social Muslims are with non-Muslims. He led with the stat that 56 per cent mix with non-Muslims outside of their home on a daily basis. Yes, it’s true that 21 per cent visit non-Muslims once a year, and the same figure never visit non-Muslim homes.  Audiences were not told, however, that 17 per cent of Muslims have social visits from non-Muslims in their homes on a daily basis. That figure rises to 19 per cent on a weekly basis and a fifth on a monthly basis. Muslims polled by ICM make a similar effort to visit the homes of their non-Muslims friends on a daily, weekly and monthly basis.

Nor did Trevor Phillips seek to interrogate this question. He did not consider why some Muslims would not visit the homes of non-Muslims. Did he not consider the health of individuals? Disability or long-term health issues may limit social activities and visits. What of economic factors like the cost of bus fares in deprived areas limiting social mobility and activities?

Young Muslims were also more likely to have non-Muslim friends visit their homes on a daily basis. And social mixing also exists on social media platforms. These factors were simply ignored.

The ICM poll has its flaws but it remains a comprehensive look at the views of 51 per cent of self-identified Muslims in England and Wales. Nor did the poll explore the diversity of Islamic belief – were individuals Sunni, Shia, Deobandi?

Just over a fifth of Muslims polled make no effort to visit a mosque, and 17 per cent only attend on special occasions. This is not a measure of religiosity; but it speaks to how individuals interpret their own faith. The documentary failed to show the diversity of belief outside of liberal and conservative binaries.

Trevor Phillips drew a comparison between how Christians and Muslims understand their faiths.  This matters in the context of freedom of expression. ICM’s data did show a clear divide between Muslims and the control group sample on blasphemy.

Responses in the control group were more in favour of publishing cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. A fifth of non-Muslims who rejected this position were Christian.

Opinions in the control group sample were even more divided on the question of publishing cartoons that mock the prophet Muhammad. Almost half said that publications should not have this right. And that included 32 per cent of non-religious people and 50 per cent of Christians.

His own analysis of the polling data allowed him to argue that  policy makers had misjudged the aspirations of Muslim integration when compared to Hindu and Sikhs.

Difficult questions around women about obeying their husbands may owe to cultural conservatism given the over-representation of South Asians in the poll data. Phillips did at least seek some understanding of this question. One woman suggested that obedience in the context of pleasing God would suffice. How representative these positions are of course, are open to interpretation and insinuation.

It’s true that 35 per cent of 18-24 year olds also found polygamy acceptable. He did not inform the audience that 34 per cent of Muslims aged 18-24 did not find it acceptable. Disagreement on this issue grew with each age category until we arrive at the over 65s.

This pattern continued into the question of integration. Trevor Phillips gave weight to the small majority of Muslims who wish to lead a separate Islamic life. Yet he did not reveal that 49 per cent of Muslims want to integrate with non-Muslims in all aspects of life. And that is broadly true among British Muslims young and old.

Phillips goes on to speculate that 500,000 Muslims in Britain want to live parallel, separate lives. He does not afford the same level of speculation for the greater number of Muslims seeking total integration. This type of speculation appeared earlier in relation to sympathy for suicide bombings among four per cent of Muslims; but not for the one per cent of the control sample who also expressed sympathy.

A proclivity towards antisemitic tropes is a troubling finding. Yet British Muslims also expressed tolerance towards Jewish communities.

Phillips also made a confusing statement about the caliphate and ISIS. Just 7 per cent endorsed the principal of a caliphate. That figure drops to 3 per cent when asked if they support how ISIS established their violent version of a caliphate.

ICM also justified the use of the word ‘sympathy’ in relation to violence and support for terrorism because it had appeared in other surveys. Yet again, our understanding of this vague term remains open to interpretation. Putting aside social desirability bias, a small minority of Muslims still expressed any sympathy for terrorism or violence.

Muslims (34 per cent) were also more likely than the control group survey (30 per cent) to report individuals to police if they suspected their involvement in terrorism in Syria. Yet this was not reflected in the documentary.

Other points missing from the documentary included that non-Muslims had also expressed similar levels of sympathy for violence against unjust governments. That also extended to use of violence against police injustice.

Muslims were also more likely to condemn the use of violence to protect their family. This is also true for non-violent radical groups. Nor were the desires or sympathies for violence among non-Muslims explored.

The poll does highlight some troubling and positive views among British Muslims. At times Phillips did highlight some nuances in the poll data – like the generational divide on LGBT issues.

Misrepresenting ICM’s poll data does not improve debate.

The post How Trevor Phillips misrepresented ICM’s poll on British Muslims appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Now, we know that this is not about hate crime work and anti-Muslim hatred, though this work also brings out the most beautiful and tender stories of compassion and care between people and which need to be highlighted when so much news is negative.

This was a Facebook post that we received from someone and it highlights and debunks the myth that Muslims are modern day Scrooge’s, wishing no-one a Merry Christmas. The text says it all and we wanted to highlight it in full.

“I just want to share this with folks: Muslims generally get a great deal of bad press especially when it comes to Christmas, many people believe that because of Muslims, we are now encouraged to say “Happy holidays” in place of the traditional “Happy Christmas/Merry Christmas.”

This evening and rushing to do my last minute shopping on this Christmas Eve, as I entered the supermarket, I noticed a Muslim lady rushing with her shopping trolley to her car, I smiled and said “Hurry out of the cold” To which she replied with a huge smile “Merry Christmas” and I thought…I love that this lady just said that to me, it kind of made me think how integrated we in the UK generally are.

Then later, I entered my local corner shop to pick up some last minute table snacks, I noticed he had “Christmas hats” and wanted to purchase one which said “Santa`s little helper” but I was all spent up and this little shop doesn’t have a card machine. I paid for the items and as I was leaving, this local shop keeper gave me the hat and wished me a “Happy Christmas” now it isn’t as though I use his shop often because he doesn’t take debit card payments but because of his small act of kindness, he now has a regular customer.

It is with little exchanges such as these, we come a long way in correcting the skewed vision of how Muslims are portrayed as wanting to change everything and steal our Christmas from us, it just isn’t true.”

The post Facebook Post by non-Muslim Debunks the ‘Muslims Don’t Want to Wish a Merry Christmas’ appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The Director of Faith Matters and TELL MAMA, Fiyaz Mughal, spoke at the Big Iftar event, organised by Innovate Walsall, and raised the issue of social justice being closely entwined with Islam. The Director stated that this being the case, it was imperative that Muslims play their part in countering hate, intolerance and injustice against any community, if they are targeted because of a part of their identity.

The work undertaken by TELL MAMA over the last 3 years was also raised. This has involved assisting over 3,700 people who have reported into TELL MAMA and with over 300 arrests which have been made directly through the work.

Fiyaz Mughal also talked about the need to report in anti-Muslim hatred and particularly for Muslim women to report in the harassment that they may receive at a street level. He also raised the fact that data from TELL MAMA shows that visible Muslim women are the ones most targeted because of their visibility and that women who wore the Niqab (or religious face veil), were sadly more likely to be targeted through more aggressive incidents.

The final message was that Muslims are looking for equality, nothing more and nothing less and that reporting in anti-Muslim hate would strengthen that objective by drawing a line with perpetrators. “This country,” he said, “has the systems in place to redress grievances such as hate incidents and hate crimes. Sometimes, it may not be the outcome that you are looking for, but you stopped being a victim the moment when you reported it in.“

If you share our belief in the importance of integration, tackling hate crimes and extremism and in developing cohesive communities, then we would like to hear from you.

You may also believe in the value of fostering inter-faith dialogue and if you want to volunteer, we have our opportunities in our London office.

We are currently accepting applications for office volunteers. You will have a passion for making a positive change, strong administrative and office skills, and be interested in gaining experience within the sector.

To apply, please send your CV and covering letter to Iman About-Atta, Deputy Director at iman@faith-matters.co.uk