Re: Enemies not Allies
Reply #53 - January 27, 2011, 03:53 PM
An interesting event, but I thought the panel was too large, the scope too wide and the time too short for much progress to be made in developing a consensus and agreeing upon a common position and future approach.
Understandably, the organisers wanted to look at the way in which both the authoritarian right (BNP, EDL, SIOE) and their counterparts on the left (Stop the War, UAF), use and distort the debate for their own ends. Given the time restraints though, a focus purely on the former would have been better and may have gone some way to avoid the rushed nature of the second half of the event. Else, making this an all- or half-dayer would have been the way to go.
Douglas Murry was certainly entertaining, and every bit as talented an orator as I'd expected, but I think he had a part to play in what became a rather confused discussion regarding the EDL. Whilst all panellists and vocal attendees seemed to be in agreement that the BNP were hijacking the fight against Islamism in various ways and for various reasons, no such agreement was forthcoming on the EDL. I find this bizarre considering the origins, membership and activities of this organisation, not to mention the statements made by prominent EDL members. The BNP, at present, are a fast dissolving entity, and one that most people have a reasonable understanding of in terms of their ideology. The EDL, on the other hand, have rapidly expanded and are something of an enigma to the British public. I could well imagine that a word association game with many people may go something like: "BNP"..."racist", "EDL"..."err, hmmm, I dunno, English??". That they have not yet been labelled in the public consciousness makes them dangerous. They also have a big street presence and, unlike the BNP, the EDL's constituent mix of old school neo-Nazism and revived 1970's/80's hooliganism, represents a genuine risk of street warfare in the UK.
I hope that no one involved in CEMB or One Law for All would want to allow Muslims to be made to feel that they are at risk of physical attacks. The fact that this would be strategically disastrous in beating radical Islam, in promoting social cohesion and in freeing those trapped in "Muslim communities" is an aside. More importantly, we must never ever resort to the promotion or appeasement of physical violence against other humans simply for their thoughts and beliefs. By forming alliances, however strategic and transient, with the EDL, we would be doing exactly that. It would achieve nothing that we currently fight for, it would destroy the good name of secularism and, I should hope, it would make it difficult for us to look ourselves in the mirror. The conference title was "Enemies nor allies", and the EDL are just that.
The role that the CEMB and One Law for All must play, as Maryam stated repeatedly and passionately yesterday, is as an alternative. We exist, in part, to show people that you CAN disagree with Islam, with Islamism and with actions carried out in their name, without being racist, without being bigoted, narrow-minded, hateful, threatening, violent or divisive. If we fail to show the greater public that they can criticise Islam, legitimately, for the sake of liberalism and freedom, then we leave them stuck - in either frustrated self-censored apathy, or in the hands of groups just as extreme and just as dangerous as the Islamists we oppose.
Topic: Enemies not Allies