Schoolboys punished...for refusing to kneel in class and pray to Allah

[Phx_Dem]

Two schoolboys were given detention after refusing to kneel down and 'pray to Allah' during a religious education lesson.

Parents were outraged that the two boys from year seven (11 to 12-year-olds) were punished for not wanting to take part in the practical demonstration of how Allah is worshipped.

They said forcing their children to take part in the exercise at Alsager High School, near Stoke-on-Trent - which included wearing Muslim headgear - was a breach of their human rights.

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1031784/Schoolboys-punished-detention-refusing-kneel-pray-Allah.html?ITO=1490

[hatrack]

1. Hmm . . "Mail On Sunday" . . . could that be the Daily Mail, perhaps?

:eyes:

[MercutioATC]

2. I'm all for exposing kids to new things, but this crosses the line.

You can't force a kid (or anybody) to perform ANY religious action in school.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. Forget giving them an American coin.

[MercutioATC]

8. You're preaching to the choir there...and with the Pledge of Alleigance...

I'd like to see both go away.

However, that doesn't justify dressing kids up and making them go through the motions of a religious ceremony.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. There are many forms of religion.

Dress. Language. Money. Family...

Coercion is a many-splendored thing.




:toast:

[Krashkopf]

30. Wonderful quote from Mark Twain RE: "In God We Trust"

"´In God We Trust.´ It is the choicest compliment that has ever been paid us, and the most gratifying to our feelings. It is simple, direct, gracefully phrased; it always sounds well -- In God We Trust. I don´t believe it would sound any better if it were true."

[mikelgb]

3. oy

call out the brigades

[Marrah_G]

4. This would piss me off also- but then I don't live in the UK

[LeftishBrit]

29. I do. And I work in primary schools. And this is not part of educational practice here.

See my other posts.

The 'Daily Mail' gets things very distorted most of the time. And if it can demonize Muslims, or modern education, or both at the same time, it will.

[Marrah_G]

31. Ahhh ... I understand. I had no idea the paper was one of "those"

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. Accepts story at face value.

Knee jerk bigoted slurs against muslims.

[Book Lover]

6. Daily Mail!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3556922

[Phx_Dem]

9. thanks for the info

I don't read british papers much. I didn't realize their reputation was so tarnished.

[Book Lover]

11. You are very welcome

:-)

[Judi Lynn]

34. Thanks for pointing this out to those of us who missed baby_mouse's post!

Very helpful:

The Daily Mail is racist, cynical, manipulative and is for the British equivalent of freepers, and there are plenty of those on this side of the pond.

Do NOT, I repeat, NOT, treat the Daily Mail as a newspaper. It isn't a newspaper.

Usually you can tell what a writer's up to from the slant of the article. Doesn't take a genius anymore, does it?

Thank you, very much.

Belated thanks to baby_mouse.

[baby_mouse]

27. Most of them are worthless.

One or two still attempt some semblance of dignity. The rest of them are at the intellectual level of mental patients wandering around naked in the streets.

[Cleita]

10. Same thing happened to me and many others in parochial school.

Of course Catholics don't call their god Allah, but same difference. Somehow this story though doesn't ring true though. It seems to be baiting the bigotry in its readership. I'll bet if anyone called the school they would find that this is just a fabrication and never happened.

[dsc]

20. your parent s chose, and paid for, that school

that is wholly different.

[Cleita]

22. Oh, I don't disagree. Just saying. n/t

[devilgrrl]

13. Oh those MAH-slims! I hear that they make pita bread with the blood of Christian babies!

:sarcasm:

[Deja Q]

*sigh* If schools would keep ALL the religious claptrap out of the classroom,

this wouldn't be an issue.

Reading, writing, arithmetic is all great.

This religious fluff was not in schools in my day. (I know what was, but that's a separate topic.)

Religion DOES have its place. School isn't it. Church is. All pastors tend to say the same things about loving one's fellow humans. Isn't that sufficient?!

Forgive me, my ignorance.

[Fumesucker]

25. Not *all* pastors.. not by a long shot n/t

[verges]

35. Actually,

since religion IS a very important part of the world's current political landscape, I think it is important to teach what the major players are about. Not in a prosletizing way, but instructive, so as to foster understanding. How can we possibly/seriously expect to resolve anything in the Mideast without a basic understanding of Islam? How can we truly understand our own Euro-American history without a basic background in Christianity?

[awoke_in_2003]

41. The fact that religion is such a big part

of politics does not mean we should teach about it- WE SHOULD DRIVE IT OUT. Religion of any kind has NO place in our politics. Period. In the last 28 or so years, the religious right has gained a bigger and bigger foothold in our politics. Time to cut the foot off. If we start respecting the mixture of christianity and politics now, what happens when we start getting larger muslim populations? Will we have to start respecting a husbands right to treat his wife as a subject? Do we start letting them gain a foothold? No, we were born a secular nation, and it is damn well time to start getting back to it.

[verges]

53. Ah, I see...

teach only the way things ought to be; not the way things are. Completely ignore that roughly a third (a guess) of the world is Muslim. Completely ignore the fact that from Constantine through the reformation, the Christian church WAS the most important political body in Europe (and therefore having a direct bearing on 21st century Americans.)

Are you xenophopbic, isolationist or both? Religion is STILL a very strong driving force in mankind. Much stronger, I'm afraid than logic or common sense. You can't combat the enemy by ignoring him.

I am not advocating proletyzing in the schools. I do, however, think it would be prudent to instruct the basics in a comparative way.

[awoke_in_2003]

55. "Religion is STILL a very strong driving force in mankind"

And as long as it is, we will continue to be a primitive creature. As far as teaching the effect of religion goes, no problem. But let's get the blinders off and start realizing that religion has done way more harm than good. Let's start calling religion what it really is- a false, unprovable belief that makes people feel warm and fuzzy. Maybe once we start grasping this as a civilization we can start using our brains for more important things, like renewable energy sources.

[dmallind]

14. While understanding the Mail is biased this kneejerk anti-kneejerk is also

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2821,n,n
http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=8799711
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/uk-world-news/2008/07/04/prayer-refusal-pupils-disciplined-100252-21266725/
http://www.congletonguardian.co.uk/uk_national_news/3194628.Prayer_refusal_pupils__disciplined_/

It's not that the Mail won't impose its own rightward slant on things, but the chance of them flat out making something up, especially something on multiple news wires apparently originating with the Press Association, is low.

This without a doubt happened.

Without a likely doubt the detention was intended for refusing to do what a teacher directed rather than any imposition of Islam. The UK does not have the same fervor for rugged individualism as the US, especially for the young.

i would have received detention in my own British school had I refused to participate in class. It's not imposition of religion but imposition of discipline, or obedience if you prefer.

Was the school at the least shortsighted and silly in doing this? Yes. Potentially stupid and venal. Was it a sign of a special status for Islam or the upcoming Shari'a in Britain? Psshaw!BUT it was not some false canard made up by vicious rightwing screed writers attempting to sabotage multiculturalism in the UK either. It was kids not doing something silly even when the teacher said they had to. Nothing more or less

[aspergris]

17. What's really sad

Is that I went (mostly) to private religious schools in the US and was NEVER forced to engage in prayer, let alone don any religious garb, yet in the british PUBLIC (although they call them private- that's a different discussion) schools, kids were forced.

There is a simple test to see whether it was a "special status" incident. Did schools also have kids engage in Christian, Buddhist, etc. prayer on penalty of discipline?

Good for goose, good for gander, etc.

[LeftishBrit]

24. First of all, do NOT believe this story without proof! See my other post.

The Daily Mail are considerably less trustworthy than 'Fox News'.

Secondly, Christian prayers in school assembly are still common and used to be universal. Technically, one could opt out; but most kids, at least in my time, were embarrassed to do so.

And thirdly: children ARE taught in British schools about ALL the world's big religions. It is *not* specific to Islam. They are also taught about Christianity, Judalism, Hinduism, etc.

[aspergris]

26. First of all

Somebody else posted a # of links BESIDES the mail that confirm the story.

I am well aware the mail is tabloid-esque.

But there were multiple sources.

But the point was the kids were disciplined... iow, in THIS case they were punished. They had no OPTion to OPT out.

I didn't ask if they were TAUGHT about them. In this case, they were punished for not donning garb and PARTICPATING?

Were they similarly forced to don yarmulke's, etc. and engange in various OTHER religion's prayers?

Personally, I don't think they should be forced to engage in ANY form of religious prayer.

But given that they were, the alleged 'it's not a special status thang' is only true if similar incidents involving OTHER religions are given. And i have seen none

[LeftishBrit]

28. None of the other sources is a big independent journal

Most probably got their info from the Daily Mail in the first place.

However: what's probably true is that a couple of parents made some sort of complaint. Whether the complaint was justfied is another matter!

'In this case, they were punished for not donning garb and PARTICPATING?'

THIS is the part of the story which I am seriously sceptical about! I suspect that they were punished for refusing to do some schoolwork pertaining to Islam, and they or their parents presented it as 'refusing to don the garb and pray to Allah'.

In any case: if it did happen, then the teacher was in violation of all rules about good school practice, and of the National Curriculum guidelines, and is liable to be disciplined for it. It is NOT part of British educational practice to demand that children engage in the practices of any of the religions that they are studying (unless they are attending a faith school; and even then there are normally opt-out provisions). Indeed as I said in another post, serious believers in most religions would be offended by non-believers treating the sacred practices of their religion as part of some educational game - so such an action would not be *pandering* to Muslims; it would be *offensive* to Muslims, as well as unfair to the pupils concerned.

'the alleged 'it's not a special status thang' is only true if similar incidents involving OTHER religions are given'

Or if the incident did not happen as described! Or was the idiocy of one particular teacher! - and either of these must be the case. I go into primary schools almost every day as part of my job, and can see what happens, and I can assure you that state schools are NOT forcing children to take part in Muslim practices! And we have a national curriculum here, so there is a fair bit of regulation of what can take place. It's not as though one local authority could just decide to do something like this.

[aspergris]

32. nobody denies

that IF the incident didn't happen as described, then said criticisms are undeserved.

I also see it as the case as people accept as GOSPEL articles/reports that report things that they want to hear (already believe) and discount even if multiple sources what they don't want to hear.

So, of course, my statement only goes with the assumption that they kids WERE punished for refusing to don muslim garb and particpate in muslim prayers.

[LeftishBrit]

40. You are assuming that the 'multiple sources' are independent.

It seems that the local paper reported a complaint by a couple of local parents; the Daily Hate-Mail took it up and spread it with the implication that it is somehow a general aspect of modern British teaching; and others have followed.

And the point is: *even* if it happened as described, it would just mean that one teacher was an idiot and broke all the rules. It doesn't mean that schools in general are forcing children to engage in Muslim religious practices and punishing them if they don't, or giving Islam some sort of special favour. They aren't. And I'm in Britain; spend a lot of time in schools; know lots of parents (some of whom are quite militant atheists) of children in the school system, and lots of teachers, and a certain number of people involved with educational policy in various ways - so I would certainly know if there was a general policy in this direction.

[aspergris]

42. Not really

"It seems that the local paper reported a complaint by a couple of local parents; the Daily Hate-Mail took it up and spread it with the implication that it is somehow a general aspect of modern British teaching; and others have followed."

I didn't see that implication. The issue was reported. I didn't see the implication that this was widespread. Are you sure that isn't an inference that you made vis a vis them?

Even isolated incidents of suckiness are still suckiness.

"And the point is: *even* if it happened as described, it would just mean that one teacher was an idiot and broke all the rules. It doesn't mean that schools in general are forcing children to engage in Muslim religious practices and punishing them if they don't, or giving Islam some sort of special favour. They aren't. And I'm in Britain; spend a lot of time in schools; know lots of parents (some of whom are quite militant atheists) of children in the school system, and lots of teachers, and a certain number of people involved with educational policy in various ways - so I would certainly know if there was a general policy in this direction."

correct. and IF it did happen, it deserves scorn.

I don't recall that any mention was made in the article that this was determined to be some sort of national/general policy.

[LeftishBrit]

45. OK - fair enough - it's just that right at the moment there seems to be an epidemic of articles in

the British RW press, aimed at giving the impression that 'political correctness' is running mad over here; and that we are pandering too much to other cultures, etc.

I probably wouldn't have made such an issue of this one single article, otherwise.

[aspergris]

46. I think to some extent it's true

But my exposure is mostly through reason.com's daily brickbats, and my friend who lives there.

AND the legal blogs. I keep up with the court cases and there are some scary incidents of thoughtcrime seeping into british culture/law.

I recognize there is less free speech in general (Race Relations Act, etc.) but some of this stuff is getting a bit absurd in the UK - vis a vis PC.

[LeftishBrit]

47. Well, I personally wouldn't go by reason.com...

I've had a brief look there, and they seem to be libertarian rather than liberal/left. Probably reasonable on things like the drug war, but pretty right-wing on such topics as the welfare state; and therefore fundamentally opposed to what I'd consider some of the best aspects of British culture.

[aspergris]

48. I prefer diversity

of sources. Of course Reason is libertarian. Every one of their brickbats is REFERENCED and I go to original sources. But I will NEVER limit my sources to just the "liberal/left". That would be as absurd as limiting them to faux news, etc.

It's not about what Reason is "opposed" to (or for). It's about them reporting on things I don't see in the leftie press. That's why I read varied sources - and will continue to do so. To get the whole picture. Reason is the "libertarian Flagship" much like The Nation is the progressive flagship, and National Review is the conservative flagship. So... I'll read all 3 thanks!


"There will always be an England"

I am generally disgusted by their creeping PC'ness.

The best sources are some of the legal blogs, though.

[LeftishBrit]

54. I will read anything...

but I will never accept that right-wing views are valid (I don't mean by this that I will never accept that any views expressed *by a right-winger* are valid - a generally right-wing person can have some non-right-wing views). Nor will I accept accusations of 'PC-ness' and the like from non-liberal sources; because they basically mean 'too liberal' or 'too tolerant and accepting of minorities'.

After all, the assumption is somehow that we have less freedom of speech than 50 or 100 years ago.

But do we? No. Britain was always well-known as a country where socially, freedom of everyday speech was subordinate to good manners and etiquette.. There were all sorts of rules about what one couldn't talk about. 'A gentleman never discusses politics or religion'; and of course no sex! And all sorts of rules and regulations about HOW one could say things; all sorts of things 'weren't manners'.

Overall, freedom to discuss all sorts of topics has increased quite a bit in the last generation or so; and etiquette has decreased, for better or worse. But so-called 'PC-ness' basically means applying principles of good manners and etiquette to minority groups and previously disadvantaged groups. Like other forms of good manners and etiquette, it can sometimes become an affectation, or place superficial forms ahead of substance. So it's sometimes important to emphasisize that superficial manners - whether of the 'PC' or any other sort - aren't enough, and that actions speak louder than words. But attacking 'PC', while not placing it in the context of a longstanding British (over?)emphasis on manners, comes across as an attack on the acceptance of minorities and/or attempts to remediate disadvantage.

[aspergris]

58. I don't really see this as relevant

to the issue. The issue wasn't about right-wing or libertarian VIEWS, it was about right-wing or libertarian sources.

THe three different presses (to simplify into 3) selectively report what they think is important. Simply put, if you limit yourself, you limit exposure to events and ideas. Generally speaking, to a large extent, people will either ignore, or explain away stories that don't fit their metanarrative.

One viewpoint where my mind WAS changed by libertarian and rightwing sources (not to mention my career and life experience) was the Right to Carry. If I had not read legal blogs, and libertarian/rightwing sources I never would have been exposed to these views. I strongly support right to carry. I also used to be an agnostic pro-lifer. Yes, they exist :) It was the IDEAS I read on leftwing sources that helped me CHANGE MY MIND and become pro-choice. So, I will continue to expose myself to diverse ideas. Imo, it's cowardly to limit oneself to self-affirming circle-jerk of agreement.

I also generally don't play that right-winger/left-winger/libertarian game.

I accept ideas as ideas, and make my decisions accordingly.

I am well aware of the longstanding british emphasis on manners. After all, not to do so - wouldn't be cricket :)

But seriously, when you have umpteen points of data - time after time, you come to a conclusion that Brit PCness is getting a little ridiculous.

[muriel_volestrangler]

33. Origin of the story is the local Congleton Chronicle

http://www.chronicleseries.com/page2.asp?PageID=800

dated 3rd July - before the equivalent ones on Google News, and credited by the Press Association (who would be the last people to miscredit a story).

[LeftishBrit]

37. Mmm. I wouldn't totally trust a local paper on such things either...

though it's probably true that the parents did make some sort of complaint.

At any rate, the implication that has been made by the Daily Mail and other sources are that in general the Muslims are trying to make good English children follow their wicked religious customs, and our soft politically-correct multiculturalist teachers are pandering to it.

While I can't rule out one teacher being an idiot, this is *not* an accurate description of modern British education, and I'm getting bloody sick of the right-wing press trying to imply that it is.

[muriel_volestrangler]

38. The story only ever blames the teacher

I don't doubt that many Daily Mail readers will think they've just read that Muslims are doing this (did you see tonight's Dispatches, with the various examples of the anti-Muslim stories?) but there a definite quote from the council (in the local paper) that they're investigating, and papers won't normally make up quotes as specific as that.

[LeftishBrit]

43. OK - I don't doubt that the complaint was made.

And it's not even impossible that the allegation is true. Some teachers can go overboard in their desire to make instruction 'concrete' and 'realistic'; and while most teachers would have the sense not to do this about religion, it's possible that one did.

However, I'm not even talking just about regular Daily Mail readers: even on this thread there are people who seem to think that it indicates that Islam is being treated as a 'special case' in British schools. It doesn't; but I am sure that the reason this is getting so much play in the press outside the local paper is because of a constant suspicion on the British right that Muslims are being favoured over 'good English Christan kids'.

Individual schools and teachers can do very stupid things. And parents and children can sometimes make unfounded complaints. And either of these can be misrepresented by the media as representing something general about British education or modern life in Britain more generally. A year or two ago, there was a report in a British paper of parents complaining that their child had been forbidden to attend the (state) school Christmas party, because he had said that he wasn't a Christian (atheist, not another religion). This would be totally against most schools' policies - in fact, outside faith schools, it's likely that only a minority of pupils would be regular churchgoers, and a significant number would be atheist or agnostic. I don't know whether the parents were misrepresenting things, or whether that particular headmaster was a little tyrant. But I remember that the story did lead to some assumptions here that British schools in general exclude nonbelievers from Christmas parties - which never happened even in my very un-PC school in the 1970s (where the music teacher once told us all that 'You have to be humble to be a Christian').

So: British schools don't favour Christians to quite *that* extent; and they certainly don't favour Muslims (except for the few Muslim faith schools); and one can't believe everything the British press says; and even when one can believe it, one certainly can't take it as representative. And right at the moment, there seem to be a rather exceptional number of articles in the more RW British papers trying to convey directly or indirectly that 'political correctness is running mad!'

[LeftishBrit]

23. It may not be made up outright....

but it's likely that there is a tiny grain of truth, with lots of crap around it. And I can't quite tell where the grain of truth lies.

In Britain, children *are* expected, as part of the curriculum, to learn about all religions. This does not mean that they are expected to take part in prayers or religious rites of other cultures. (And in fact, I think that Muslims would be more offended by non-Muslims 'playing' at Muslim religious rites as part of a school exercise, than at most of the things they're accused of being offended about!) I think that by far the most likely explanation is that the children didn't want to do some schoolwork about Islam; that they or their parents presented it as a requirement to 'pray to Allah'; and that the Daily Hate-Mail took this up. It's also of course possible that one individual teacher was an idiot; and that the Hate-Mail are representing this as typical of all teachers.

But to give an example of what they do: here's an example of something that came up a year or two ago in the Hate-Mail, and where I know, due to my contacts as an researcher on education, what really happened. They claimed in an article that British schools are not teaching about the Holocaust because of the risk of offending Muslims (whom they clearly assume are all antisemitic). In fact, this was based on a report for the Government on teaching difficult subjects in school, which I have read. The report stated that ONE school had chosen not to teach about the Holocaust because of concerns not about 'offending' Muslims, but about the risk of some Muslim pupils making antisemitic or Holocaust-denying remarks that might upset other, especially Jewish, pupils. In fact, the vast majority of British secondary schools DID teach about the Holocaust, and it was then about to be made a compulsory part of the British secondary school history curriculum - which it now is. But the rumour spread. This shows how much they can distort and mislead, even where the basic facts are concerned. (Of course, one irony is that the Hate-Mail were themselves largely pro-Nazi almost until WW2 began.)

[Lex]

15. oh yeah, like I believe that

sounds like twisted up bullshit on a stick

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. Good thing they weren't teaching what they do to chickens in Santeria

[aspergris]

18. Sublime agaiN!!!

"I don't practice Santeria... I aint got no crystal ball"

:)

[Bluebear]

19. "Outaged", check. Muslims, check. "Forcing", check. Check, check, check, check, check.

Bullshit.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

21. This is the same paper that brought

us this story: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1031062/Faceless-aliens-spotted-crowd-Wimbledon.html

Faceless 'aliens' spotted in crowd at Wimbledon

By ALEX MILLSON
Last updated at 11:38 AM on 02nd July 2008

Comments (0) Add to My Stories
With the blankest of blank expressions on their faces, these mysterious figures have been popping up in the most unlikely of places.

The faceless mutants have a penchant for A-list celebrity bashes and have been spotted at Elton John's White tie ball and Harrods summer sale, opened by Sex and the City star Kim Cattrall.

With a membrane of skin stretched tightly over their eyes, noses and mouths, the alien-like figures were most recently snapped 'watching' a match perched on Murray Mount at Wimbledon.

[fascisthunter]

36. Let Me Guess: More BS to Stir Anti-Muh-slim Sentiment

yup....

[Radical Activist]

39. This is what the Christian Coalition wants, isn't it?

Mandatory prayer in school.

[Overseas]

44. Daily Mail story -- BUT ALSO it was just a class exercise-- why did the kids refuse?

It was just a class exercise-- trying out a different country's practices. What's with the ultra-purist boys that they wouldn't try something out just as an exercise. Geez. They seem like real rigid fundamentalists in their own right.

[Fumesucker]

49. Atheism is far more prevalent in the UK than the US

As an atheist I can tell you that I would also refuse to pray to any god whatsoever.

[WildEyedLiberal]

50. Are kids who refuse to recite the Pledge of Allegiance "ultra purist fundamentalists" ?

If you make allowances for children to refuse to participate in certain ideological rituals as a matter of conscience, then you can't just extend that allowance to kids who are protesting things you personally disagree with. Assuming the story as told in the article in the OP is for the most part true, why should the boys HAVE to pantomime a religious ritual? Would you feel that forcing kids to recite John 3:16 in class is also as harmless as "trying something out"?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

62. Thank you for saying it better than I can

I'm against ANY religion being jammed down anyone's throat, even under the guise of the "educational experience". If this were about kids being punished in this country for choosing not to engage in a Christian "educational experience", the tone of the thread would be a total 180.

[LeftishBrit]

57. I can understand not wanting to say a prayer of another religion...

I don't think they should have been forced to. And if they were, it was some rather silly individual teacher's idea; not a general part of the curriculum here.

[Codeine]

59. Because nobody should have to either

offend their own deep-held beliefs by worshiping a god they believe is false or play-act religious activities if they hold no religious views of their own.

[Malikshah]

51. And I would get detention for not doing class exercises as well

It is not the same thing as the Murdoch rag would have folks believe.

[WildEyedLiberal]

52. The Daily Mail is a rag, but dismissing the entire story as "bullshit" does the left no favors

The Daily Mail IS a rag, so it's possible this story isn't accurate, but the fact that it's been sourced by several other news outlets makes me think that this teacher was disastrously out of line and, yes, ridiculously over-the-top PC. Pretending that stuff like this NEVER happens, that there is no problem whatsoever with overbearing political correctness, that it's all a fabrication of RW Islamophobic agitators is not helpful. Yes, be vigilant for exaggerations and distortions, but sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending that there isn't a valid complaint in cases like this will, ultimately, only help the RW as it will enable them to say "look, the left is totally okay with allowing Muslims to dictate everything to their whims."

If you want to defang the Daily Mail and other propagators of anti-immigrant sentiment, you need to respond to incidents such as this in a way that shows that you are responsive to the concerns of average citizens who would be pissed off by something like this without falling into the "blame all Muslims" trap. Because whether people here like it or not, there IS an undercurrent of resentment in Britain against many immigrants, and it's not confined to the ultra-right. Ignoring this discontent, or portraying anyone who is unhappy with the state of immigration in the UK as a backwards racist, will only marginalize the left and drive more and more people into the arms of the BNP and other far-right parties. Addressing these concerns does not mean scapegoating Muslims - it does mean a willingness to confront so-called "PC" standards (such as the idea that anyone who has any problems with current immigration policy is a fascist, which is unhelpful and counterproductive to say the least) and engage in a real dialogue that aims to make the transition to a multicultural society easier for both native Britons, who can learn to be more accepting of people who don't share their religion or culture, and immigrants, who need to realize that, in moving to a new country, they must assimilate into the broader social fabric of that country. The black and white "you're a racist!" "no you're a politically correct jellyfish!" gets you absolutely nowhere.

[LeftishBrit]

56. This would have more validity...

if British hostility to immigrants and immigration really had anything much to do with concerns about Islam.

Right now, concerns about Islam are one excuse. But I honestly think that if there were no Muslims and/or no Islamophobia in Britain - the problem wouldn't be all that different! Anti-immigrant sentiment has been common in Britain all through living memory; and mostly it had nothing to do with Muslims. In the early 20th century, it was Jews and Irish. In the 50s and 60s it was Afro-Caribbaeans; in the 60s and beyond it was Asians; nowadays, it's often East Europaeans.

SOME of the Asians, and essentially none of the other groups, have been Muslim.

I don't think that the problem IS so much with scapegoating Muslims. It's with scapegoating all immigrants - and 'immigrants' is often taken as including British-born descendants of immigrants. Our right little, tight little island has always done this to some extent, and no doubt always will, but it's not an attitude to be encouraged, let alone whipped up, in the way that the tabloids do.

[Fumesucker]

60. Hostility to immigrants is an almost universal human trait..

Asians that Americans (and Brits) can't tell apart hate each other's guts.]

In fact, that was how the British Empire ruled, divide and conquer, the wogs always hated the Brits, but they always hated the other wogs worse so the Brits would just set the wogs at each other's throats by arming and training a less powerful faction to take on the most powerful faction.

[Retired AF Dem]

64. Is the Telegraph a rag also?

Toddlers who dislike spicy food 'racist'

Toddlers who turn their noses up at spicy food from overseas could be branded racists by a Government-sponsored agency.
The National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/education/2261307/Toddlers-who-dislike-spicy-food-racist,-say-report.html

[WildEyedLiberal]

66. Yeah this is kind of my point

You can't just dismiss all of these articles as "right wing hatemongering." Obviously enough of this dumb shit happens to be reported fairly regularly by several different sources, not just the Daily Mail. I think it's just foolish to pretend that the PC culture in Britain isn't often over the top in its hysteria to avoid "offending" people, the vast majority of whom would likely not be "offended" by the kind of behavior the PC police crack down on. Those few who are "offended" by everything under the sun need to grow the fuck up.

[LeftishBrit]

68. If four right-wing talkshows and Fox News all reported examples of 'welfare cheating'...

would you say that, "Oh but it must be valid! It's coming from so many sources!"

I don't think Americans always realize how right-wing most of our press is.

And the point is: while some of it (in both countries) involves actual lying, quite a lot is distortion by selectivity. There *are* undoubtedly people who cheat the welfare system! But when there are lots of right-wing media reports about them, and far fewer reports about poor people who suffer long-term hardship and worse by slipping through the net, or about rich people who cheat on their taxes, it is easy to give an impression which suits the agenda of 'let's cut welfare; there are too many welfare queens cheating!'

Similarly, there *are* undoubtedly some British people who are excessively 'PC'. (It's part, IMO, of the much more general British characteristic of a sometimes-excessive preoccupation with manners, which can lead to a focus on form rather than substance.) But when media sources report all of the sillier cases of this, and don't report all the cases of racial abuse and discrimination, or all the cases of British people taking offence at minor breaches of etiquette that have nothing to do with minority groups; and ESPECIALLY when they combine this with constant scaremongering about immigrants 'overrunning the country', then it *does* serve the right-wing anti-immigrant anti-minorites agenda.


'Those few who are "offended" by everything under the sun need to grow the fuck up.'


Well, I do agree with that!

[LeftishBrit]

67. Not a 'rag' like the Daily Mail; but extremely right-wing

Commonly known here as the 'Torygraph'.

And I know from personal experience that newspaper reporting of books, articles and research reports is often very unreliable, even in a good newspaper, and even when the newspaper has no political axe to grind. They tend to fix on a few sentences, taken out of context, that might produce a 'sound-byte.

I will try and read this book published by the NCB, and find out whether it actually says what the Torygraph says it does, and in what context. But the Torygraph has already given *one* misleading impression here; it described the 'National Children's Bureau' as 'government-sponsored' - which could lead to the impression that this remark is from a government directive or government site; and some people here on DU *did* interpret it in this way. In fact, the NCB is an umbrella organization of people working with children, which does get *some* funding from the government, but a lot of it from charities. It's classed as 'semi-independent'; and certainly its publications are not in the category of government documents.

[LeftishBrit]

69. Here are some comments on the Telegraph and other papers, from the thread mainly on the Daily Mail

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3556922

depakid (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-03-08 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
7. A note about the Telegraph might also be in order....

Thermodynamics trumps economics
Alert Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

truebrit71 (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-03-08 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. ..and the Times, The Sun and The News of the World...
Edited on Thu Jul-03-08 01:20 AM by truebrit71
... Don't you mean "The Torygraph"....


...ah yes what a lovely empire Rupert hath created...
Alert Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Lydia Leftcoast (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-03-08 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #8
25. The Times is conservative, but it's for more intelligent, upper crust types
The Telegraph is for the equivalent of the more affluent Fox News viewers, and the Sun and News of the World are below the National Enquirer in credibility.

The U.S. has committed war crimes according to the standards established at the Nuremberg Trials. The invasion and occupation is costing $250 million per day. Your annual income taxes pay for less than 1 second of the Iraq War.

[deaniac21]

61. This is obiviously just another part of the Daily Mail's attack

on the religion of peace!

[LeftishBrit]

63. Slight update..

according to recent reports in the Times and Torygraph, this teacher has been suspended while the case is investigated, and also concerning 'other issues'.

So it seems as though something *may* have been going on; but it's also evidence that this sort of action is *not* accepted as normal teaching practice over here.

[Phx_Dem]

65. thanks for the update. nt