Salma Yaqoob | ukwatch.net

Practising What We Preach

Ellie Keen — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:43:05 +0000

It was five years ago that my frustrations with mainstream parties prompted me to get involved in party politics. At the time I felt that the political process simply did not reflect the broad values of most people I knew – and especially those engaged in the anti-war movement.

These values were reflected in an opposition to imperialism and neo-liberalism, although most people I came into contact with very rarely, if ever, used these words to express their concerns.

Instead they asked why our foreign policy could not be based more on cooperation instead of conflict. They wanted a better quality of life for them, their friends and families, and felt people in other parts of the world were entitled to the same as well. Instead what people see today is war and instability abroad, and increasing discontent at home despite an apparently wealthy society. People are worried about the future of their children. They are concerned at widening inequality, the increase of stress and depression, the record levels of binge drinking, drug abuse, violence and vandalism. How could it be that after a decade of uninterrupted economic growth our society could feel more fractured, unequal and unhappy? Why are our kids reported to be the unhappiest in Europe?

The answers to these concerns lie in a critique of the way the way free market fundamentalism has increasingly invaded and distorted our lives, and the need for society to be protected from its all consuming appetites.

The challenge for those of us who aspire to live in a more humane and just society is to be able to explain the source of people’s everyday concerns in a language they immediately understand, and point to solutions that are immediately realisable.

There is a lot of talk in government circles about the need for a ‘national conversation’ about what ‘Britishness’ means in the 21st century. If we are to have such a conversation, it would be well served by looking back to the future.

The ideas of universal healthcare; a living wage; participatory democracy; public services that are accountable to the people who use them; food, medicine and shelter as a human right; these are not particularly radical ideas. They are common sense ideas enshrined in the UN Charter.

Add to that list a foreign policy that places a premium on diplomacy, and international cooperation, plus more decisive action on climate change, and there is the basis of a manifesto a sizeable slice of the British public would sign up to.

Why are these ideas so radical today? At one stage most would have been regarded as the bread and butter of social democracy. They appear radical now only because of the way neo-liberalism has shifted political discourse to the right over the last 20 years. All the while the gap between what the politicians do, and what people want, has widened.

The challenge of building political organisations that can bridge that gap is best realised and tested through day-to-day engagement in the practical struggles and frustrations of people’s everyday lives. Electoral politics, despite its pitfalls, forces such an engagement. Effective campaigning does likewise. Engagement with politics of a mass character is essential. It forces you to absorb the experience of the people you aim to represent, and it puts your views to the test.

It is also essential that we practise what we preach. How we build is as important as what we build. Our political organisations must embody the values that we wish to see reasserted in broader society. Our culture should be one in which disagreement is not seen as disloyalty and where inclusivity is not confined to those who sympathise completely with your own views. Whatever our forms of political organisation they must be places where we bring the best out of people, where the instincts that brought them into politics are raised to a higher political and moral plane.

Racism The Real Obstacle

jo — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:30:48 +0000

This week Ive been told that women like myself are submissive, oppressed creatures who need rescuing by white, male politicians.

But at the same time, Ive been told that women like myself frighten white, male politicians and that we are a threat to social cohesion in this country. Frankly Im getting fed up with other peoples obsessions being projected on people like me.

If the government wants to tackle barriers to integration, how about tackling some of the real obstacles that we encounter? And, in this country, the widespread imposition of Islamic dress is not one of them – by any stretch of the imagination. In fact post 9/11, the most prevalent pressure on Muslim women is to NOT wear Islamic dress, out of fear for their personal safety.

Thats not to say that cultural and patriarchal pressures do not exist in the Muslim community. They do – and many of us are actively engaged in challenging them. I defend the right of women to choose, for themselves, to wear the niqab or hijab. But I equally defend the right of women to choose not to wear particular forms of dress, whether its in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran or Britain.

As a Respect councillor in Birmingham, a significant proportion of constituents visiting my surgeries are Muslim women. But the majority of issues I have to deal with dont concern family or cultural conflicts – they are about a lack of affordable housing, a lack of school places, a lack of healthcare and a lack of real equality.

A recent report by the Equal Opportunities Commission found that girls of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin, 90 percent of whom are Muslim, are making remarkable progress at school. Despite lower family incomes, they have overtaken white boys in their GCSE performance, and are rapidly catching up with white girls.

Discrimination

The report goes on to say, however, that when it comes to getting jobs, they are faced with a brick wall of discrimination. And remember, only 1 to 5 percent of these women will be wearing the niqab.

But instead of addressing this wider problem of discrimination, Bill Rammell, the higher education minister, now backs universities that want to ban the niqab. Women who have chosen to wear a veil, and who value education and the greater independence and freedom that education brings, now have a new dilemma – remove your veil or get back in the home. How does this help women, for whom access to education is the key to empowerment and independence?

Unfortunately the consequences of government underinvestment in public housing, or of discrimination in education, dont excite the headline writers in the same way as New Labours liberating crusade for Muslim women does.

But of course, this whole debate about Muslim integration is just a smokescreen – a smokescreen to divert attention from the governments failure over the war on terror.

We are told by the government that there is no link between foreign policy and the growth of Islamic extremism, because such extremism existed before the 9/11 attacks. This wilful amnesia is breathtaking – the threat of Islamic extremism existed pre-9/11 because brutal Western intervention in the Muslim world existed pre-9/11. And the threat of Islamic terrorism has increased post-9/11 because our foreign policy has had even more brutal consequences in the Middle East post-9/11.

In Britain there has been a growth in Muslim radicalisation – not towards Al Qaidas politics, but on the streets in the anti-war movement and at the ballot box in voting for anti-war candidates. Thats the predominant mood of Muslim radicalism in this country, and its one we welcome and wish to deepen.

The anti-war movement has done more for Muslim integration in this country than any number of government citizenship classes. Weve won the argument against the war by standing shoulder to shoulder. We now have to win the arguments against racism and Islamophobia. If we continue to stand shoulder to shoulder, I am confident that we can win this battle too.

Salma Yaqoob is vice chair of Respect and a councillor in Birmingham. This is an edited extract of her speech at last Saturdays Respect rally on Islamophobia. For videos go to www.respectcoalition.org

Rumours and Riots

Alex Doherty — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:43:24 +0000

Having witnessed events in Birmingham over the past few days, I see an alarming picture emerging. Not only have there been two deaths, scores of people injured and property damaged, but I have been taken aback at the breathtaking irresponsibility of some community representatives. Instead of calming the situation, they have inflamed it.

It is important to be conscious of the impact of language and scrupulous about verifying facts. Where there are acknowledged to be “simmering tensions” in an area, the responsibility is even greater on community leaders to exercise care. Yet if one traces events to the trigger of the weekend riots – the alleged rape of a Jamaican girl by Asian men – the opposite has been the case.

Despite now admitting he had no proof or facts, DJ Warren G aired the allegation on his radio talkshow last Tuesday, going as far as to organise a demonstration outside the shop where the alleged rape was said to have taken place. The message that went round the community was one of a black woman needing to be protected against “Asians” rather than individual criminals. At a second demonstration on Saturday, community representatives were calling for Asian shops to be boycotted.

Both communities suddenly felt they were under attack from the other. Businesses were attacked and hundreds of youths took to the streets to “protect” “their” communities. It was clear even at community representatives’ meetings on Sunday that emotions were dangerously out of control. Many were unable to comprehend that people from both communities shared similar feelings of vulnerability and fear.

There is a vacuum in local Asian leadership. And while many from the African-Caribbean community were determined the situation be contained, a small but vocal group seemed more interested in repeating inflammatory warnings of a “race war”. Resentment was present before the alleged rape. There has been a widespread perception among the African-Caribbean community that Asians are doing well at their expense, and rumours that Asians receive more public funding. If public funding grants in north-west Birmingham are examined, African-Caribbean projects have received the largest proportion. Millions have been invested in helping black enterprise and training projects. The Sikh community received one substantive European grant, and the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have received the least.

In the aftermath of the violence we will no doubt be subject to more debates on “multiculturalism” and “integration”. The truth is that it is economic inequalities – real and imagined – that are driving events in Birmingham. Its inner-city wards are among the most deprived in the country, and all of those living there – white, black, Asian – are disadvantaged.

To find a way out of this crisis, representatives from all the communities must come together and demand the resources that the area needs. The political system has encouraged competition between different disadvantaged communities for what amounts to crumbs. This has been compounded by the role of the Liberal Democrat-Tory coalition that runs Birmingham city council and has increased pressure to divert resources from inner-city areas to more affluent suburbs. Meanwhile, the macho attitude shown across our communities in recent days has made women less safe. Tomorrow, women from both communities will march together to demonstrate our common interests: solidarity, not racism, is the answer.

__Salma Yaqoob is a community mediator in Birmingham, spokeswoman for Birmingham Central mosque and vice-chair of Respect
yaqoobsalma@yahoo.co.uk__