Thursday, November 1

Guardian Comment is Free: More than two sides to this story

I've just posted the following article on the Guardian's Comment is Free site. Check it out:

Hate literature and extremism are issues that need to be addressed, but it's sad that the media seek binary reactions to British mosques. " More

Listen very carefully, I will say this only once. Or maybe twice. In fact, I find myself having to repeat it ad infinitum ... the literature that the Policy Exchange and the rightwing press have been flagging up as "found" in mosques, is indeed loathsome. Yes, I'm a Muslim, and I don't like it; I don't agree with it and it does not represent the views of the broad and diverse Muslim communities in the UK. The irony of the fact that this genre of literature is published and distributed out of Saudi Arabia - whom our government routinely supports and protects - should not be lost on anyone during the current visit of the Saudi monarch.

I'm glad these "exports", which have been coming into the UK for more than 20 years, have finally gained attention. I'm not so glad that this narrative is crystallising beneath headlines such as "hate-filled mosques". Is this to support the subtext that the people who go to mosques are hate-filled too? Should we add it into the toxic mix of integration, terror laws and Hizb ut-Tahrir? A small minority do indeed have some shocking and violent views. (Note: another "denouncement" that I must make incessantly as a Muslim.) However, it's sad that our reporters seek binary reactions to British mosques. Is that cutesy mosque next door to you really a bomb-making factory? We need to ask ourselves difficult questions about whether beneath these headlines lurk ugly attitudes. How does Britain really feel about mosques on the high street? Is Britain really as prejudice-free and welcoming to those of other faiths and cultures as it claims to be?

Hurrah for Hazel Blears! She is going to save the day! Yesterday she announced a £70m package aimed at addressing extremist influences that proliferate in "ungoverned spaces" such as the internet, snooker halls, bookshops (this goes without saying) and of course, the so-called "hate-filled" mosques, for which £25m has been reserved. The very fact that she has done this means she has bought into the dangerous and flawed premise that mosques are inherently bad places filled with bad people. It is reminiscent of "You're with us, or you're with the terrorists."

It is an eerie echo of the two-part thriller that Channel 4 is airing called Britz, which tracks the lives of two British Muslim siblings. One chooses to be a spy, the other a bomber, and the drama asks the stark question: "Whose side are you on?" It makes me cross. I'm not on either side, and I will not choose between these simplistic and reactionary choices. I'm on the side of making this country a better place for everyone and preserving the right to determine how and where I worship while maintaining harmony in civil society.

I believe Blears is genuine in her intentions but is going about it in the wrong way. Who will "approve" what can and can't be said in mosques? Whose interpretation of Islam and the issues facing Muslims will be rubber-stamped by the government for mass communication? Inayat Bunglawala makes a similar point about bookshops with reference to what can and can't be stocked in "Islamic" bookshops. Who should dictate what can and can't be said in these ungoverned spaces that Blears has described? So far, the Saudi-influenced views have been setting the pace. Swinging the pendulum to the extreme in a different direction will only be a hollow and short-lived victory.

Which Islam will be the British gold standard? Will mosques be kite-marked for government approval before youths aged 16-35 are allowed to enter? Or perhaps a Michelin star rating system would work better?

I often joke that the mosque I frequent is my "local". I don't drink alcohol so a pub is inappropriate for my desire to socialise as well as spiritualise. The mosque, however, is perfect: a reinvention of the social club meets faith centre. My "local" holds charity fundraisers for Darfur, Kashmir and Iraq. It has yoga classes, and computer lessons. Elders can receive health advice which they may be unaware they need. There is extra school tuition for children. Young mothers can get together to alleviate boredom, isolation and depression.

To reiterate (yet again!), mosques, just like Muslims, have responsibilities to exercise good social citizenship by working to eradicate extreme and violent views. But equally, their very presence can be a source of community support and cohesion. Think of them as a revival of the community centre that once tied localities together, a new kind of "local" on the high street.

Labels:

1 Comments:

Blogger purpleXed said...

Policy Exchange suggests that it is a few dozen books in bookstores that make innocent minds vulnerable and susceptible to extremists views.

Let's hope that they convince/facilitate booksellers to offer discounts on 'alternate' works for encouraging a wider readership among the young
of the following.

Here are the ten that would do the magic ;-)

The Islamist by Ed Hussain
Celsius 7/7 by Michael Gove
Londonistan by Melanie Phillips
What's Wrong With Islam? by Irshad Manji
"The Dhimmi" by Bat Ye'or
Now They Call Me Infidel by Nonie Darwish
"Because They Hate" by Brigitte Gabriel
The Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali
The Caged Virgin by Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Shortcut to Enlightenment by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (forthcoming)

10:25 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home