 he government’s Community Cohesion agenda
has suffered a severe setback. Seeking Labour’s
Deputy Leadership, Jack Straw has deliberately
inflamed Islamophobia by calling on Muslim women
not to wear the veil. Predictably he was backed
by 97% of readers of the Daily Express. Phil Woolas,
Minister for Race and Equalities, suggested that
people who ‘don’t understand the culture’ can
find the veil ‘frightening and intimidating’.
Straw has heightened this fear by justifying it,
despite supposedly warning against ‘separation
and difference’. Within a few days of publication
of his remarks, two veil-wearing women had been
attacked, and Muslim organisations had received
an upsurge in hate mail.
Research shows that the perception of conflict
or threat is the largest factor promoting group
prejudice of any kind, including racism or religious
hatred. Such perceptions are widespread: a recent
study suggested that about a fifth of people would
consider voting BNP. Seven per cent of British
Muslims believe suicide bombings in Britain are
justifiable, while 13% have a lot of sympathy with
the 7/7 bombers. Soon after 7/7 nearly half of
Britons considered Islam, ‘as distinct from
Islamic fundamentalist groups’, posed a threat
to ‘Western liberal democracy’. Rushanara
Ali and Geoff Mulgan recently warned that “We
are now in territory in which small mistakes can
have huge consequences”. Unless trust can
be restored, before long a race riot will erupt
in which people will be killed. Extremists on both
sides will exploit this to stir up further hate
and fear. Another 7/7 will be brought closer. Electoral
reform and school integration are two policy areas
where action could help avert this appalling prospect.
David Cameron has joined the Islamophobic fray,
with remarks headlined as ‘Ban Muslim ghettos’.
Our electoral system encourages Cameron and Straw’s
strategy. Of Labour’s forty-one most marginal
seats, the Tories are the challenger in 34. Labour
tries to retain voters who might switch to the
Tories, and can ignore the views of the millions
who would never vote Tory. Under proportional representation
(PR) Labour would need to compete with a true Socialist
party, and could not afford to pander to xenophobia.
Research on over a hundred nations shows that PR
has the strongest impact of various factors on
preventing racial conflict. This is probably because
it enables more parties to become serious contenders,
representing all significant viewpoints, thus encouraging
people to pursue their grievances through politics
rather than disorder.
Fear of the BNP is not a reason to oppose PR.
International research shows that there is no relationship
between the proportionality of the electoral system
and the vote of far Right parties. Where the BNP
have gained councillors, people have soon recognised
their inadequacy. It is when people feel that the
mainstream parties ignore their concerns that some
will be seduced by fascists or Islamist extremists.
This would be much less likely under PR, which
is favoured by nearly two-thirds of Britons. A
truly representative parliament would not have
approved the Iraq war, which has boosted support
for Islamist extremism.
Recent reports on the racially segregated towns
where riots took place in 2001 show that the measures
available to local politicians are far too modest
to promote cohesion significantly. For instance
in Bradford progress in employment, education and
housing is behind the targets set, while in Burnley
racial incidents have increased. After the 2001
riots former Commission for Racial Equality chief
Sir Herman Ouseley investigated Bradford’s
racial problems. Bradford youth told him of their ‘ignorance
about cultural diversity’ due to the racial
segregation of their schools. Yet the government’s
policy to encourage more faith schools will increase
segregation. Already over four-fifths of white
children attend schools which are at least 90%
white, while about one in ten Asian children is
at a school which is at least 80% Asian. A large
multi-national body of research shows that contact
between people of different races reduces racism.
This effect is stronger among children than adults.
It is much stronger when the races have equal status
in the contact situation, and when the contact
is sanctioned by authority. This could best be
achieved in schools, as status differences between
the races are less salient to young children than
to adults.
It would be wrong to discriminate by refusing
to fund further Muslim schools, given that there
are far more Christian schools. However we need
to consider the likely results of an increasing
number of Muslim schools alongside Christian schools.
Nearly half of Muslims would prefer to send their
child to a Muslim school. Most parents would not
want to be seen as letting down their own racial
group, and would not want their child to be in
a minority at school. A House of Commons select
committee stated that parents often choose schools
containing mostly children from their own race
due to ‘ignorance and fear of other cultures’.
Given the level of Islamophobia described above,
hardly any non-Muslims would send their child to
a Muslim school. Therefore proliferation of faith
schools would probably lead to a norm in most districts
of sending one’s child to the school of one’s
faith. When prospective parents set up home most
would choose to live close to a school of their
faith or dominated by their racial group. As a
result, residential segregation of the races would
increase. The government’s wish for more
faith schools also ignores a poll finding that
two-thirds of Britons oppose state funded faith
schools, and studies showing that they achieve
poorer results once the relatively privileged nature
of their pupil intake is taken into account.
Trevor Phillips has pointed out that some faith
schools are less racially segregated than nearby
non-faith schools. However this is because nearly
all current faith schools are Christian, and are
popular with both black and white parents. This
would not apply to Muslim schools. A wise policy
would reduce the number of Christian schools, and
improve under-performing schools, so parents could
have confidence in all schools. The government
has dogmatically excluded faith schools from the
remit of its new Commission for Integration and
Cohesion. Please take part in its consultation
events, which will be announced soon at http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1501520.
The government proposes that schools should be
twinned to give children the opportunity to meet
others from different backgrounds. However research
shows that anxiety about meeting people from an
unfamiliar group would counteract the attempt to
reduce prejudice. A head teacher with experience
of twinning his mostly black school with an all
white school stressed that this ‘is very
difficult to achieve, and can be disastrous if
done badly.’ The relatively infrequent encounters
which school twinning provides may fail to dispel
preconceptions about the other group of children.
They do not enable children to make the long-term
relationships which teach them that individual
characteristics are much more important than racial
or religious ones.
The day after 7/7 the people of Leicester held
a rally to show their solidarity against the bombings,
with speakers from all faiths. When faced with
a common threat, people of different backgrounds
can combine to fight it, and build strong relationships
which will gradually dilute racism. Provided we
sustain trust in each other’s goodwill, the
civilised majority of Britons can unite to defeat
Islamophobia, racism, and the violence they cause.
However to achieve this, the government will need
to invest much more on a long-term basis to bring
hope to disadvantaged areas, combat racial harassment,
reform our democracy so all citizens feel they
can make their voice heard, and give people, especially
the young, opportunities to get to know people
of other races and religions.
Tim Root is author of Love, Empowerment and
Social Justice: Personal Relationships and Citizen
Action (Open Gate Press, 2005)
www.timroot.net
|
This
month
Archive
of past articles