A dominant narrative is that the far-right should be ignored altogether, lest it gives a platform for advancing their cause. However, Nick Griffin’s platform on Question Time simply exposed the BNP and the reality that it is. And providing a platform to the far-right might be necessary in another context:
Is it about time we engaged with members of the far-right, in order to debunk some of the myths around Islam and ethnic minorities? Perhaps it is no longer tenable for us to simply shove the problem under a rug; the British media has continued to paint a negative picture of Islam so British Muslims need to look to themselves for leading on change. I understand there are complex reasons as to the growth of the far-right, linked to poverty, unemployment and immigration, and that British Muslims simply cannot address this whole complex web. But maybe fostering dialogue is better than doing nothing.
By engaging with the far-right we are bringing its ideology more into the ‘mainstream’ and that is to be lamented. I believe however the growing numbers is a fact we simply cannot ignore, and that perhaps engaging in dialogue which is done in a carefully considered manner is necessary.
I am fully aware that there are those who join simply because of their pure hatred and I do not suggest engaging with them. I also personally distinguish between the leaders and the blind followers; I have faith that most human beings are essentially good and that there is merit in dialogue with others who have genuinely misunderstood and who might listen. I’m not too sure whether counter-demonstrations are the most effective response to demonstrations outside mosques. It takes just a few angry people to taint the counter-demo, which the media would pounce on, completely missing the main point altogether.
So, when I heard about the Muslim Debate Initiative’s ‘The Islamification of Britain: Myth or Reality’ event last Thursday I was pleased that steps towards dialogue had been taken. Surprisingly, the event was a rather calm affair, rather than the heated furore I had expected. There were six speakers overall but I will only mention two of them:
Abdullah Al-Andalusi was the Muslim speaker and spoke well for the most part. He highlighted that debate was a strong tradition in Islam’s history and invited an open debate which did not spare controversy. Al-Andalusi also pointed out that Muslims are not calling for Sharia law in Britain, though members of the panel disagreed. He also highlighted a poll which found that 77% of Muslims identify themselves with Britain. Overall, I think his points were very relevant to debunking the myth around Islam’s supposed monolithic nature.
The most overt right-wing panelist on the panel was Jeffrey Marshall, a senior spokesperson for the BNP. He talked mainly of Tower Hamlets, highlighting that more than half of its population is Muslim, and around half of the Councillors are Muslim. In other words, he does not like to see the sight of brown people. Al-Andalusi responded that other parts of London are dominated by religious and ethnic groups including Stamford Hill by Jews, and Lambeth by Afro-Caribeans. Marshall also highlighted the attacks of Muslim youth on religious figures. While this is of concern, it was completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Talk about Sharia personal law surfaced continuously, which shows many people are still obsessed with it, despite there being no possibility of it affecting their rights. It indicates to me that Rowan Williams’ suggestion many months ago might be the root of this whole discussion about ‘islamisation’ and people aren’t ready to forget it. The increasing visibility of the niqab – the face veil – was also a problem for some.
Whether there was more understanding about British Muslim’s place in Britain, and that is holds no threat, is hard to discern. Although dialogue is not the only answer, perhaps it was a positive start.
