You’ll get your answer if you compare the specific backgrounds (local & subcontinental) and environments of South Asian Muslims in Britain with South Asian Muslims in the US. The latter, as you know, are certainly not “very poorly integrated into American society”.

There are some specific dynamics at play in each situation — just like, for example, there are some specific dynamics involved in the situation of many British Sikhs (generally well-integrated, law-abiding, aspirational, increasingly affluent) compared to the situation of many Canadian Sikhs (disproportionately high involvement in gang activities and organised crime).

On a more general note, you should also read the following post by me on the other thread where I replied to you:

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/5896#comment-178467

“But, again, it’s predominantly about class before it’s about religion or race.”

So tell me, why are some religious, cultural or religious groups better at integrating than others? Why do South Asian Sikhs and Hindus do so much better in education and employment than South Asian Muslims?

Why do we have so many second and even third generation South Asian Muslims who are very poorly integrated into society, ghettoized, and languish at the bottom of every social indicator, be it education, employment, economic success, welfare dependancy, criminality and prison population? Surely it must be cultural.

(If you won’t accept those statistics, I’ll dig up a very reliable link for you).

Multiculturalism in Britain is stymying integration.

No, it isn’t. Bear in mind that there are other non-white, non-Muslim populations in Britain which don’t necessarily have major problems with integration, especially in the case of people at higher socioeconomic levels.

And if you think that all the problems would be solved if only everyone became identical in attitudes, tastes, customs and behaviour to whatever you believe is the average white British person, then that’s a very naive and simplistic view to have. Integration is a two-way street…..and as I keep saying, in many cases people’s objections are frequently about race rather than culture, regardless of what they may claim.

The example of Iranians in the US, and the connection to their level of affluence, is very relevant indeed. As is the issue of exactly which immigrant populations are less integrated in the US, and the average income level involved. All of which reinforce the point that “being Muslim” isn’t necessarily an intrinsic problem — it depends on the specific interpretation of Islam one believes in and (if the interpretation is a barrier to effectively functioning in a majority non-Muslim society) the extent to which one practices its tenets. The same as any cultural and/or religious background and influences originating in a different country to the one a person happens to live in. Although I certainly think that the US does a better job of promoting a shared national & cultural identity and thereby integrating immigrants compared to the UK.

But, again, it’s predominantly about class before it’s about religion or race.

“Given the fact that the United States has a Muslim population of numerically larger size compared to Britain, the analogy and the hypothetical sequence of events doesn’t necessarily hold true. Presumably you’re also aware of the large (and very well-integrated) Iranian population in Los Angeles and the Arab population in Detroit, for example. And the average income level and overall standard of affluence of American Muslims is higher than the American average.”

You make my point for me. The word is ‘intergrated’. I have many relatives in LA. Iranians in the US are, by and large, true Americans.

Would you describe the very high numbers of people here, who return to their ancestoral homeland to take part in an arranged marriage to a foreigner and then bringing that foreigner to Britain as being “very well integrated”?

What about the cultural, religious and ethnic ghettos we have in Britain? Is this helping integration.

Multiculturalism in Britain is stymying integration.

Reza,

Given the fact that the United States has a Muslim population of numerically larger size compared to Britain, the analogy and the hypothetical sequence of events doesn’t necessarily hold true. Presumably you’re also aware of the large (and very well-integrated) Iranian population in Los Angeles and the Arab population in Detroit, for example. And the average income level and overall standard of affluence of American Muslims is higher than the American average.

“A question of numbers” ? Maybe. But it’s still worth bearing in mind that Muslims still only account for 3% of the total population of people in England and Wales. Scare stories about birth rates should be taken with a huge pinch of salt, because a) birth rates for immigrant populations tend to align with that of the majority population, and b) socioeconomic level is a major factor in determining birth rates, irrespective of the ethnicity or religion of the people concerned.

As I’ve said previously on PP, it’s often predominantly about class, not race or religion.

No Jai I don’t. And despite feeling that like all religions, Islam has ugly aspects which we should be able to criticize freely, I don’t even believe that Islam is necessarily a destructive influence on British society.

I love Muslim culture. I love Iranian culture. I am immersed in it whenever I visit Iran (which I do regularly). I’ve travelled extensively or worked in many Muslim majority countries; Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Morocco, and the UAE. Fascinating, interesting places with wonderful people.

So the basic point is that it’s not actually “multiculturalism” which is the problem, but which elements of the “foreign” culture one is adding to the mix. If the “addition” is positive and enriches the majority culture, then I don’t see any justifiable reasons to object.

Incidentally remember what I said yesterday about how the greatest “non-British” cultural influence by far is actually American, as far as the UK is concerned; this country is already multicultural in nature irrespective of the presence or influence of Muslims or non-white people in general.

There is another point I need to make in relation to your remarks (on another thread) about the apparently inevitable conflict between different populations, but I’ll post that on the thread concerned.

However, to reiterate something I recently said: It’s very important that you remember that when many people object to “multiculturalism”, what they really mean is that they object to the presence of non-white people. Which means that you personally are included as a target of their bigotry and a part of a “problematic demographic” too.

Given the fact that the United States has a Muslim population of numerically larger size compared to Britain, the analogy and the hypothetical sequence of events doesn’t necessarily hold true. Presumably you’re also aware of the large (and very well-integrated) Iranian population in Los Angeles and the Arab population in Detroit, for example. And the average income level and overall standard of affluence of American Muslims is higher than the American average.

“A question of numbers” ? Maybe. But it’s still worth bearing in mind that Muslims still only account for 3% of the total population of people in England and Wales. Scare stories about birth rates should be taken with a huge pinch of salt, because a) birth rates for immigrant populations tend to align with that of the majority population, and b) socioeconomic level is a major factor in determining birth rates, irrespective of the ethnicity or religion of the people concerned.

As I’ve said previously on PP, it’s often predominantly about class, not race or religion.

No Jai I don’t. And despite feeling that like all religions, Islam has ugly aspects which we should be able to criticize freely, I don’t even believe that Islam is necessarily a destructive influence on British society.

I love Muslim culture. I love Iranian culture. I am immersed in it whenever I visit Iran (which I do regularly). I’ve travelled extensively or worked in many Muslim majority countries; Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Morocco, and the UAE. Fascinating, interesting places with wonderful people.

So the basic point is that it’s not actually “multiculturalism” which is the problem, but which elements of the “foreign” culture one is adding to the mix. If the “addition” is positive and enriches the majority culture, then I don’t see any justifiable reasons to object.

Incidentally remember what I said yesterday about how the greatest “non-British” cultural influence by far is actually American, as far as the UK is concerned; this country is already multicultural in nature irrespective of the presence or influence of Muslims or non-white people in general.

There is another point I need to make in relation to your remarks (on another thread) about the apparently inevitable conflict between different populations, but I’ll post that on the thread concerned.

However, to reiterate something I recently said: It’s very important that you remember that when many people object to “multiculturalism”, what they really mean is that they object to the presence of non-white people. Which means that you personally are included as a target of their bigotry and a part of a “problematic demographic” too.

“Reza, do you believe that the writings and philosophies of Rumi, Saadi, Hafez and Omar Khayyam would be destructive influences on British society?”

No Jai I don’t. And despite feeling that like all religions, Islam has ugly aspects which we should be able to criticize freely, I don’t even believe that Islam is necessarily a destructive influence on British society.

I love Muslim culture. I love Iranian culture. I am immersed in it whenever I visit Iran (which I do regularly). I’ve travelled extensively or worked in many Muslim majority countries; Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Morocco, and the UAE. Fascinating, interesting places with wonderful people.

But Jai, it doesn’t matter what the culture is. Multiculturalism is the problem and it is all a question of numbers.

Consider. If the Mongolian population in Britain grew to 2.5 million in thirty years through immigration and high birth rates then of course many ‘indigenous’ people would become unsettled by that. Non-Mongolians would see their neighbourhoods becoming increasingly ‘Mongolian’ in nature. The large Mongolian ‘community’ would, quite reasonably, begin demanding that their adopted nation makes more and more concessions to accommodate their unique cultural needs. Perhaps some of the Mongolians will be so rooted in their ancestral culture that a large percentage of them would arrange for their sons or daughters to go to Mongolia and marry a Mongolian to bring back to Britain with them.

We’d have areas with large Mongolian populations and non-Mongolians would leave, turning those areas into effective ghetto’s.

Some Mongolians may begin demanding changes in the law, for example traditional Mongolian courts to arbitrate on family issues. Perhaps they would lobby for schools, the police or the health service to provide special attire, which addresses Mongolian sensitivities.

Perhaps some Mongolians will demand that the state recognizes, accommodates and provides welfare benefits for polygamous marriages as they are part of Mongolian culture.

And maybe, we’ll have a situation that anyone who describes Chengis Khan as a mass murdering barbarian or criticizing Mongolian culture or history in any way will be silenced under race laws. ‘Mongolphobia’ will enter the English language.

And the inevitable backlash will be more and more ‘Mongolphobia’. More division, more polarization and more opportunities for the far-right to exploit people’s fears, prejudices and opposition to Mongol influence and their perception of increasing ‘Mongolification’ of British society.

Think about it.

I just wanted to make sure that people knew exactly what kind of “anti-fascist” you are.

A rather selective kind.

Sid, lets not continue that one. Lessons learnt and all that…

I didn’t start this silly fight and I would prefer it if my name is not brought up and associated with lies and fabrication. Thanks

One is reminded of this post’s title.

Well said.

But you are prepared for the far-right to peddle their lies and obfuscations and remain a principled observer?

What the hell are you talking about and why exactly are you making this up? I think you have me mistaken for someone else. Have things got so bad in your life that you have to resort to fabrication and character assassination to make your point?