Dean Godson on attempts by the Muslim Council of Britain and spokesman Inayat Bunglawala to rebrand:

The truth is that MCB’s new-found “revisionism” is extremely limited and owes rather more to tactical than ideological considerations. It has not undergone a public transformation, after the fashion of a Hassan Butt or an Ed Husain. If the views of Inayat Bunglawala, its assistant general secretary – as expressed recently on Newsnight – are anything to go by, it still largely blames Western foreign policy for the discontents of the world. By underwriting these attitudes, it contributes mightily to the grievance culture that fuels violent jihadism.

The problems with the MCB run far deeper than the issues of the day. For the price of winning the support of the MCB in the struggle against violent jihadism on these shores is high indeed. The coin in which they must be paid is the further ideological radicalisation of Muslim communities.

The MCB’s vision of the future for Muslims in the UK is light years removed from Mr Brown’s conception of Britishness. Its recent document on education Towards Greater Understanding: Meeting the Needs of Muslim Pupils in State Schools is a charter for segregation of the sexes – and urges strict controls on how dance, drama and sports are organised. More Arabic lessons all round, too – in line with the traditional Islamist aim of “Arabising” Britain’s predominantly South Asian Muslims.

This kind of sectionalism is perhaps more entrenched in the public services than Mr Brown realises. Why, for example, is there an Association of Muslim Police? Why is there a Civil Service Islamic Society? Why do such organisations have so little to say about Britishness? Why does “integration” seem to take place on their terms?

The worst aspect of the renewed push for respectability by the MCB is that it caters to the delusion among policymakers that there is some kind of body that can “deliver” Muslims. A Policy Exchange survey this year revealed that a mere 6 per cent of Muslims believe that the MCB represents them – and 51 per cent believe that no organisation here currently does so.

A truly radical approach would be for the State to stop treating British citizens who happen to be Muslims mainly as Muslims. In other words, why does the Government still deem their religious affiliation the most important thing about them in the public space? A prime minister from Scotland – a country that has largely left behind its sectarian past – can surely understand that.

Posted in

One response to “British Citizens Who Happen to be Muslims”

  1. IanCroydon Avatar
    IanCroydon

    “Why, for example, is there an Association of Muslim Police? Why is there a Civil Service Islamic Society?”
    It goes further, nearly every large international corporation based in Britain will have an email list consisting of Islamic surnames.
    The problem is that “integration on their terms” is a fact enshrined in the religion itself, it will take a leap of enlightenment to discourage it, like the Jews did over one hundred years ago to dissolve the ghetto mentality that had been plagueing them.
    “A truly radical approach would be for the State to stop treating British citizens who happen to be Muslims mainly as Muslims.”
    This question is probably analogous to how John Locke viewed Catholics. He was not anti-religion or anti-Catholic per se, just concerned at individuals who would honour a foreign prince more than their own country’s democratically elected representatives.

    Like

Leave a comment