Treating different races with different narratives


by Sunny
27th March, 2006 at 4:41 pm    

The weekend was an interesting insight into the double-standards that newspaper columnists and bloggers have on ‘free-speech’.

Dr Frank Ellis, champion of the BNP & Enoch Powell and an unashamed racist and sexist, led to a flurry of opinions on Harry’s Place. One representative and particularly idiotic rant from Devil’s Kitchen read:

This man is being excoriated in public for the views which he holds. These views are unpopular amongst the intelligentsia, but not in the population at large: hence the growing support for the BNP. People feel alien in their own country, and we need to understand why this is the case; the next bomber may not be brown.

Furthermore, there has been systematic lying by the liberal-left media. At no point in that article does Ellis say that the BNP are “too socialist” as he was reprted to have said. Nor does he advocate deportation of all foreigners “if it were done humanely” as was also ascribed to him. He does advocate the deportation of illegals and failed asylum seekers and he is not alone in this belief; in fact, he is on the side of the law on that belief.

This weekend the communist paper popularly known as the Sunday Times ascribed the same views to Ellis that DK blames the liberal-left media for.

To examine the first para again: it must be disappointing for DK that the BNP lost a by-election this weekend in Bradford/Keighley of all places where Muslims were blamed for all sorts of social ills. Increasing support? Keep wishing.

The logic is familiar though. Take a Hizb ut-Tahrir goon like Dilpazier Aslam, the Guardian journalist that bloggers were laying into last year when he wrote ‘We rock the boat‘. Their view that there is growing support for them and other extremists because of the Iraq war is dismissed out of hand by the same brainless right-wingers because, well, Al-Qaeda has been around to kill infidels a lot longer and have a fascist ideology… yada yada.

Funny that, I didn’t realise the BNP had only recently come into prominence since the ‘Muslim menace’. But of course we know these nazis have had different enemies, and apologists to feed their victim mentality, as the bogeyman changes : from Jews, Carribeans, Africans, Asians, asylum seekers to Muslims etc.

Would the same defenders of Ellis be happy with Hizb ut-Tahrir being allowed to freely berate Jews and all ‘infidels’? I suspect not. No one is asking Ellis to be deported though any British born Muslim with bigoted views would get that accusation.

When Aslam wrote his article most of the anger was about: “how dare this Muslim boy talk about being ‘sassy’ and justifying Muslim anger against the war and economic deprivation when someone just blew up London. I mean who really cares about what Muslims think, they all just justify suicide bombers anyway.”

Even the Sunday Times article linked above is gentle with this loving ‘SAS man’. As I’ve stated before, I don’t want him fired unless he has shown bias in his work, but there are double-standards in the narrative.

When David T argues for letting Hizb ut-Tahrir speak or to let David Irving walk free, an army of dissenting voices swarm on HP saying he has gone soft on ‘Islamofascists’ and about growing anti-semitism. Yes, racism is a problem – against people of all races, as Christopher Alder found out to his loss.

To para-phrase DK: “People feel alien in their own country, and we need to understand why this is the case”. That applies just as well to British Muslims.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Civil liberties,Race politics,Religion






29 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. Jay Singh — on 27th March, 2006 at 4:45 pm  

    People feel alien in their own country, and we need to understand why this is the case; the next bomber may not be brown.

    Sounds just like the apologists for the July 7th attacks in reverse – no doubt this guy thinks the Soho Pub bomber had a point.

  2. Don — on 27th March, 2006 at 5:27 pm  

    ‘unpopular amongst the intelligentsia’

    Ah, the intelligentsia. They think they’re so bloody clever.

  3. Bikhair — on 27th March, 2006 at 5:30 pm  

    Sunny,

    “People feel alien in their own country, and we need to understand why this is the case; the next bomber may not be brown.”

    And the failure of “assimilation” is on whose part? Exactly what are these people supposed to be assimilating into? Water and oil? I think so. The impossibilities are endless.

    What does it mean to be British these days?

  4. Vikrant — on 27th March, 2006 at 5:40 pm  

    What does it mean to be British these days?

    Being crazy about football (soccer to ye Websterised zombies ), drinking more than that is good fer them and …. being snobs.

  5. Roger — on 27th March, 2006 at 7:30 pm  

    “What does it mean to be British these days? ”
    Feeling alienated of course.
    An interesting guide to the meaning of Englishness and Britishness is The True Born Englshman by Daniel Defoe: http://classiq.net/daniel-defoe/the-true-born-englishman/index.html

  6. El Cid — on 27th March, 2006 at 9:31 pm  

    So much for pro-war left

  7. Kulvinder — on 27th March, 2006 at 9:36 pm  

    The amusing thing is Nick Griffin’s trial and the upcoming trial of those arrested over the muhammad cartoons are almost certainly politically inspired (or at least significantly nudged).

    Its a way that a government thats lost touch tries to ‘keep it real’ with everyone concerned. They can say to the white people they’re going after the islamic fanatics and they can say to the muslims they’re going after the white racists.

  8. Sid D H Arthur — on 27th March, 2006 at 11:20 pm  

    That applies just as well to British Muslims.

    I don’t agree that alienation or marginalisation is a solely UK Muslim thing. And its also a nonsequitur to pronounce that UK Muslims are more likely to be anti-Iraq war because they are marginalised. Go to the West Midlands, you’ll see plenty of aleinated and marginalised Sikh and Hindu kids.

    I’m against the war and I’m also well-adjusted, liberal and professionally successful. I was New Labour and still tend to think Gordon (Brown) is where this country’s future is at, politically. I’m not against the War because I have some inherent knee-jerk response belief that its anti-Glonal-Muslim issue. Bollocks to that, thats too simplistic. I was against the war because I didn’t think war was in the best interests of the Iraqi people first and international equilibrium, second. And you know what? There are untold millions like me. I just happen to be of a Muslim background.

    Political Islam has suddenly undergone a growth spurt and all Muslims are dragged into it kicking and screaming whether they want to or not.

    My other gripe is the need for the constant comparions between Hizbut Tahrir and the BNP. They are not comparable entities. Look are the membership numbers of the BNP? And then look at the membership number of HT? They’re not even close. Yet the HT is more often that not used as a barometer for Muslim opinion in the UK as a whole. Do you think anyone with 2 brain cells cold countenance trying to bring on some BNP clown and make him speak on behalf of the white majority?

    OK thats my bitching off my chest. Carry on with what you were doing.

  9. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 12:47 am  

    Sid

    Alienation is part of growing up. People from all backgrounds are alienated. Black youth are alienated, Asian youth are alienated, working class white youths are alienated, Irish people are alienated from society, blah de blah people are alienated from society.

    The problem arises when this alienation transmutes into a narcissistic existential hatred with a violent ambition – ie: July 7th terrorism. When such ‘alienation’ becomes allied with the nonsense and fascism of global Ummah Islamism, we are in a different realm altogether. Most ‘alienated’ people in British society sulk for a little while and then GROW UP. They get married, get a job, settle down, realise their stake in society, realise their children need to be brought up in a stable and equitable society, in other words, they realise their youthful narcissism and self-pity and grow up. They develop a stake in British society, the bare minimum attachment to our values and well being. At most, their alienation takes the form of a bit of sneering, or an occasional Asbo, hanging out outside off licences, smoking a bit of weed, maybe a social disorder here or there with an occasional riot a la some West Indian youth in the 1980′s. Sure, there are persistent problems of alienation amongst some communities for example amongst some young black males, but it doesnt manifest itself in a vicious hateful ideology that seeks to rage and kill as many people as possible.

    You see, the alienation that is being fed into the meat grinder of jihadis is in a DIFFERENT CATEGORY altogether – it is almost self evident that this is something else. It is not comparable with the alienation of other groups, of Sikh boys in Southall or Hindu kids in Coventry or white boy chavs in Essex – it has dangers, it has consistently proven to be a most cry baby and stubborn form of nihilistic self pity that manifests itself at the most extreme edge in shoe bombers, the stupid motherfuckers of July 7th, those currently on trial at the Old Bailey etc etc etc. And disease has attracted black, white and Asian people to its particular self pitying fascist nihilism – look at the number of converts involved in these actitivities.

    It is a virus. This is the thing that is spoken of when decrying extremism and the self perpetuating sore of Muslim alienation in Britain. This virus is self inflicted in many ways. Other people have to go through the same shit as Muslims too – the racism, misunderstanding, marginalisation and all the rest of it. But they do not go into a nihilistic sulk about it. And more importantly, too, the MAJORITY of Muslims do not tread down that path either – showing that these mentally decrepit ideologues and activists are nothing but self pitying cowards who cannot face dealing with the real world of living in peace with all people, getting your head down and progressing with life honestly, and opt instead to stew in their own hatred and pathetic self pitying nihilism.

    That is the difference, I believe.

  10. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 12:50 am  

    I mean that is the reason for what might be seen and described as Muslim exceptionalism in the area of British society on the issue of ‘alienation’.

  11. Raw Data — on 28th March, 2006 at 1:07 am  

    “Would the same defenders of Ellis be happy with Hizb ut-Tahrir being allowed to freely berate Jews and all ‘infidels’?”

    Uh…Where have you been? People (all sorts) do that all the time.

  12. Sid D H Arthur — on 28th March, 2006 at 1:25 am  

    Jay

    The thing is, I don’t buy that idea alienation alone breeds shoe bombers and Underground terrorism. Otherwise we could infer, as you’ve highlighted, there would be a problem on our hands.

    Terrorists are increasingly likely to be motivated by campaigns of ethnic nationalism or religious extremism. Often the two go hand in hand, such as the aspirations of Sikh militants for an independent state of Khalistan or the fundamentalist Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), which seeks to establish an Islamic state in Egypt.

    Are you telling me that the Sikh terrorists who blew up the Air India flight to Vancouver in 1985 bought into this “narcissistic existential hatred with a violent ambition” theory? No more than the next man on Foleshill Road, I’m sure. Sinn Fein derived a large amount of funding from rich Irish American tycoons. Moneyed, golf-playing and tanned – they don’t sound like they’d be too bothered with “narcissistic existential hatred”.

    That description sounds more like motives behind David Copeland, the BNP bomber who was a loner and somewhat deranged. The point is, are Asians made to feel alarmed at BNP infiltration? Have U-Gov polls been commissioned to assuage the alarming up-take of BNP extremist ideology and its threat to the inhabitants of Southall and the East End?

    What exactly is the threat to UK safety by the HT? They’re a bunch of racist monomaniacs – but how representative are they of the Muslim population in the UK. And it would be useful to know what exactly is their numbers?

  13. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 1:51 am  

    Sid

    Yes – undoubtedly the Air India bombers were motivated partially by a nihilistic hatred and grievance culture. As were the Birmingham Pub Bombers etc etc etc

    That description sounds more like motives behind David Copeland, the BNP bomber who was a loner and somewhat deranged

    That description perfectly describes the inanity and stupidity of the people engaging in suicide bombing and Jihadi activity in the UK today. The question of alienation being in some way explanatory for boys from Derby and Hounslow strapping explosives to themseves in Tel Aviv, or from Dewsbury doing the same in London, or from Brixton going to shoe bomb a plane in the Atlantic, or the fertiliser bombers at the Old Bailey now. Are you seriously suggesting that this psychosis is a legitimate response to the world situation? Since when has Derby or Hounslow been Zionist occupied?

    Pizza Hut I am not talking about – they are what they are. I was talking about the idea that alienation is of itself an explanation for the drift to extremist amongst British Muslims – as if only Muslims are alienated in British society. When that manifests itself and transmutes into the nihilistic menace we have seen consistently, you know that this is exceptional, it is not the norm. It is a virus attached to the body of British Muslims – one given succour by the sort of grievance culture that ties together in its reckoning unemployment in Bradford with a territorial dispute in the Middle East and can somehow ‘explain’ or ‘understand’ how alienation can lead to someone attaching explosives to themselves on the District and Circle Line. It does not fit Sid.

  14. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 1:52 am  

    Otherwise we could infer, as you’ve highlighted, there would be a problem on our hands.

    Sid, we do have a problem on our hands. Unless you subscribe to the theory of Home Office Machivellianism as an explanation for the high alert over suicide bombing and the rest of it. It is a reality.

  15. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:05 am  

    Are you telling me that the Sikh terrorists who blew up the Air India flight to Vancouver in 1985 bought into this “narcissistic existential hatred with a violent ambition” theory? No more than the next man on Foleshill Road, I’m sure. Sinn Fein derived a large amount of funding from rich Irish American tycoons. Moneyed, golf-playing and tanned – they don’t sound like they’d be too bothered with “narcissistic existential hatred”.

    Sid

    You make a category error here. Are you really suggesting that the motherfuckers that place bombs in various places or carry out genocides in Gujarat are no different from those in Foleshill Road, Kilburn or Wembley who in the haze of their prejudices and biases mouth rhetoric supportive of general aims? There is a colossal difference, even if their attitude creates and contributes to the exceptional atmosphere that allows such nihilism to persist, and they are hypocrites and bastards, they are not the same as the actual perpetrators, they are still average joe.

    We may have got our wires crossed. I was not speaking about Hizb ut Tahrir in relation to the threat of the BNP. I was speaking more generally of this attitude that needs to be nailed – that the alienation of Muslim men is in some way explicable and explanatory as a contributing factor to the nihilistic hatreds of July Seventh-ism. It gets back to cause and effect – and this is an argument that I will never accept – not least because if you accept it you begin to cede ground to those who proclaim their understanding of why Hindus went on a rampage in Gujarat, for example, or the next time a Combat 18 firebombs a mosque or gurdwara, people like Devils Kitchen imply they will be able to understand why it happens, because ‘the next bomber may not be brown’, as he puts it above. It is a dangerous path.

  16. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:17 am  

    Sid

    I understand the point you make about double standards over threat perception of the BNP and Hizb ut Tahrir. But this is a level I was not addressing, and it seems we got our wires crossed. Unless Hizb ut Tahrir openly call for violence, of course they should not be banned. Nor should the BNP. I was talking slightly to the left of the thread and trying to pin down this question of alienation being an explicable factor in the rise of extremism, and pointing out that alienation of this type has found a particular ideology that transmutes it into a violent menace. In and of itself ‘alienation’ is a relatively harmless rite of passage. It only becomes exceptional when it is transfigured by a deeply stupid ideology of violence and hatred. Twelve months ago people could just about argue that it doesnt matter, that this is hype, that it is not the primary manifestation of extremism in our midst, that it is blown out of all proportion. But after 7/7 that is not feasible any more.

  17. Devil's Kitchen — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:27 am  

    It’s very lovely to find someone even more obtuse than Neil Harding, although I never thought that I’d find such a creature.

    Increasing support? Keep wishing.

    You stupid sod; have you investigated where the BNP were 12 years ago? They still got almost one third of the votes! For fuck’s sake, man, they only lost by a few hundred. Does that not worry you?

    Like Neil, you assume that I support the BNP and/or Ellis’s views: this is not so. What I do support is for them to have those views heard.

    This is what we call free speech; this is probably a concept that you are unfamiliar with but, never mind, I shall try to educate you.

    There are no degrees of free speech; either it is free or it is not. Yes, if Jew-haters, infidel-haters, commie class-warriors want to try to slap people down then I will allow their submissions. And I will argue with them or, indeed, consider their words, with all of the intellect at my command.

    Unless they are terminally stupid or ill-informed. Frank Ellis is not: you are. Now go away and learn the basic of genetics and then come back and play. OK? ‘Kay.

    DK

  18. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:32 am  

    Devils Kitchen

    What does a knowledge of basic genetics have to do with the matter? Please explain.

  19. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:34 am  

    Lord all fucking mighty he’s a fucking goth.

  20. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:35 am  

    Alright, free speech for goths, I am not prejudiced against goth, that was just a wise crack.

    No seriously Devils Kitchen, what does having a knowledge of basic genetics have to do with the matter? I am really interested to know.

  21. Sunny — on 28th March, 2006 at 3:46 am  

    DK:

    For fuck’s sake, man, they only lost by a few hundred. Does that not worry you?

    I have this view that most people are innately good and would reject Nazism in their right minds, so no – I’m not that stressed about the BNP. They and the NF were a much bigger force around the time of the 1st immigrant generation. In Keighley they lost despite a huge campaign of bullshit which traded on an old documentary about ‘grooming young white girls’ when it is no longer the case. All politics is local.

    What I do support is for them to have those views heard.
    This is what we call free speech; this is probably a concept that you are unfamiliar with but, never mind,

    Are you illiterate as well as stupid? I’ve already written above and linked to another article I wrote on the guardian blog arguing for the twat’s right to be heard. In fact on every post here I’ve written on Ellis I argue for his freedom of speech (providing he hasn’t broken Uni rules).

    Unless they are terminally stupid or ill-informed. Frank Ellis is not: you are. Now go away and learn the basic of genetics and then come back and play. OK? ‘Kay.

    See above. Now go and get some proper glasses so you can read properly before you try reply to someone.

  22. Roger — on 28th March, 2006 at 8:41 am  

    “I have this view that most people are innately good and would reject Nazism in their right minds, so no – I’m not that stressed about the BNP.”
    Er…people thought the same thing in Germany in 1930. No, I don’t think Britain is in a position where we’ll end up like Nazi Germany, but the BNP and others are both signs and causes of general alienation and help poison the way people think.
    HuT may not be as big in Britain, but they are a similar sign and- world-wide- could be dangerous. As far as I can tell the people who join HuT are the potential jihadists with intellectual pretensions and more patience than their suicidal co-religionists.

  23. David T — on 28th March, 2006 at 10:13 am  

    I don’t have a settled position on the dismissal of individuals from their jobs, as a result of their publicly expressed views or chosen political activities.

    There are proper legal restrictions which prevent many civil servants from political activities. Many employers have a “don’t bring shame on us” clause in their contracts of employment. I’m not wholly convinced that where a person is dismissed from their employment for breach of these sorts of restrictions, that it is improper. I was surprised, in fact to hear the pro-employer Freedom Association suggest at Saturday’s rally that it was.

    Religion is a different matter from ethnicity – and in most cases, religion – which are not not chosen characteristics.

    Academic staff employed within universities are, I think, a different case. Academic freedom is an important consideration. What makes Ellis a pretty borderline case is that his views have nothing to do with his field of expertise: which is, I think, Slavonic studies.

    I’d prefer that Hizb expressed their racist and totalitarian views openly, and I think it is an enormous pity that they’ve blocked WayBack machine access to the Khilafah.com website, which makes it marginally more difficult to excavate their bigotry: now that they’ve whitewashed their rhetoric.

    As for Aslam: newspapers are entitled to hire and fire their journalists in accordance with employment law. I can quite see why the Guardian might feel embarrassed to have a professing fascist on their staff: although they could have moved him to doing reports on football or gardening, rather than promoting him – rather tokenistically – to write a series of “This Is What Young Muslims Think” opinion pieces and interview. That said, given that Milne has been soft soaping and promoting the falangist Muslim Brotherhood in the Guardian comment pages, I’m not sure why Aslam’s continued employment presented such a dilemma to them. It was well known that Aslam was a Hizb ut Tahrir activist at the Guardian, among many senior staff members. I do think it was a little unfair to sack him when it became public knowledge.

  24. David T — on 28th March, 2006 at 10:29 am  

    What exactly is the threat to UK safety by the HT? They’re a bunch of racist monomaniacs – but how representative are they of the Muslim population in the UK. And it would be useful to know what exactly is their numbers?

    I dunno. HuT was a very different creature a decade ago, under Omar Bakri Mohammed. OBM was evidently an active jihadi ideologue and recruiter. It is not actively recruiting jihadists at the present: which is why I oppose its banning.

    What does concern me about HuT is that they have been, for a very long time, regarded – by important sections of the left – as an innocuous bunch of devout eccentrics whose hearts have been in basically the right anti-imperialist place. (Ditto the Muslim Brotherhood.)

    This is why, when Aslam was recruited as the guy with the inside track on Hizb, everybody at the Guardian just smiled and nodded benignly.

    It worries me a bit that fascists are mobilising. HuT probably have about 3,000 active members. The MB have a nice toehold in the Guardian. But what worries me far more is that the Left sees them as their natural allies: when historically it is the Left which has been at the forefront of fighting fascism*.

    * with some exceptions, of course….

  25. Siddhartha Singh Muslim — on 28th March, 2006 at 12:47 pm  

    Jay

    Back on this thread and taking up your comments. I wasn’t trying to legitimise nor justify the actions of the 7/7 morons. I’m trying to analyse the aftermath of a terrorist action. Two phenomena happen after a terrorist atrocity
    1 Any terrorist action de-legitimises any cause valid or otherwise, that terrorists ultimately proffer as the being their cause. Given that the 7/7 group subsequently used the Iraq War as their justification for their actions, this then could well be the reason the anti-War movement shrivelled up and died. Certainly the “stopper” jeering got louder after July last year. And once again, we saw an event that occurred after the Iraqi Invasion in March 2003s used as a justification for the Invasion a priori!
    2 The community that produced the individuals who committed the terrorism are individually branded with harbouring the same sentiments as the terrorists. Hence all Muslims are proto-terrorists.

    It’s the territory of the second phenomena that you’re straying into Jay. Hence, according to you, the reason why Bradford is a terrorist breeding ground is because it happens to be full of alienated and marginalized young Muslims. However you don’t think the West Midlands is a terrorist breeding ground for pro-Khalistan terrorists in spite of the West Midlands being similarly well-endowed with alienated Sikh youths. Are you suggesting that Sikhs have been rehabilitated since the Akali Dal disbanded? Or that the Real IRA is too much of a toothless threat to appeal to alienated streetwise Irish immigrant kids from County Armaugh, for that matter?

    The second phenomena can be the only reason why there is a disproportionate amount of attention paid to HT and Omar Bakri in spite of the fact that there has been no record of a link with them and the 7/7 bombers. Nevertheless, the terrorists were Muslim, so the natural reaction seems to be that the entire Muslim community in the UK must all subscribe to this group’s interpretation of Islam being entirely about the establishment of a Khalifa or State and fuck all else. Or that’s how the received notion goes if the MSM and the blogosphere are anything to go by. Following 9/11 the HT were regarded as a bunch of boorish cranks and now they’re Rent-a-IslamoFascist, often seen trading pearls of wisdom with Paxman on a TV set near you.

  26. Jay Singh — on 28th March, 2006 at 1:06 pm  

    It’s the territory of the second phenomena that you’re straying into Jay. Hence, according to you, the reason why Bradford is a terrorist breeding ground is because it happens to be full of alienated and marginalized young Muslims

    That is not the territory I have strayed into Sid, it is the territory the explicators of the Jihadi ideology have STATED when they ascribe this to extraneous social factors such as ‘Muslim alienation’!

    You are shooting the messenger, and I am a little confused as to the substance of your refutation. Are you really suggesting that there is not a problem?

    What is your objection, given that at several points I say that the fact that most Muslims do not tread down the path of this virus is the greatest refutation of the fact of its odious insipidity?

    Note: I am not talking about Hizb ut Tahrir or the media’s prejudices, i do not even contest what you say about that – I am talking about street level ‘alienation’ and how it feeds into the self pitying narssicissm of the jihadis – as if that is an explication of the act.

  27. Siddhartha Singh Muslim — on 28th March, 2006 at 1:26 pm  

    Jay

    no no no no buddy! I wasn’t shooting you. I’m trying to arrive at a consensus. Perhaps you’re right. Perhaps alienation is all it takes to turn a few young guys into terrorists. I’d say its somewhere in between that and arbitart external conditions.

    After 7/7 Blair defended his War record (broken that it was) by stating categorically that the the motive behind the terrorists was “NOT Iraq”. Since he was so sure what wasn’t their reasons he never said what was.

  28. polishexile — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:02 pm  

    The left did not take a lead in fighting Hitler. The communists supported him until he attacked the USSR.
    Even now if people talk about the terrorist attacks in Poland and Japan or rather the lack of them they get called racist by the left.

  29. David T — on 28th March, 2006 at 2:19 pm  

    Well yes, there was that.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.