"The commentary on the TV screen was that uniform drone of post-attack media analysis, the reactionary, the even-handed, the sympathetic and the jaded..."

Too late. It's out. I'm stealing that line.

BS,

It's a typical reaction: If society treats some of its members based on their belonging to a certain social group (could be religious, could be ethnic, could be age, could be gender, could be anything) and discriminates against them purely because of them being part of that group (voluntarily or not), then soon enough their primary identity will shift to being members of said group and they will start to 'stick together' to weather the situation.

Treat everyone who, among many other things, happens to be Muslim (by creed or ethnicity) as MUSLIM ... and you'll get a lot of Muslims "sticking together".

'Twas (is?) the same with Irish, Jews, Black/Latinos/Asians in the U.S., earlier on the Catholics in Protestant & Protestants in Catholic areas in Europe etc.pp.

But I don't think that's your actual worry here. You seem more concerned about the legitimacy of your own position and, in order to defend it (& maybe also to lay to rest your self-doubt), you are looking for the faults in the positions of those Muslims, like that Ibrahim guy on the bus, who may (well, most certainly do) see you as, as you put it so allegorically, "being a lily livered cowering apology for a Muslim."

I don't think that most Muslims in the U.K. (and, by extension, in other western countries) "equate being a minority with being a victim." They increasingly see THEIR minority as being (unjustly) victimized. And many personal experiences reinforce this perception.

One doesn't remember the many people who treat oneself normally or even are nice. But one always remembers the ONE person who treats oneself badly.

--MSK*

The politics & psychology stuff aside for a moment: you're a really great writer.

That she is alle.

MSK*
It's a typical reaction: If society treats some of its members based on their belonging to a certain social group (could be religious, could be ethnic, could be age, could be gender, could be anything) and discriminates against them purely because of them being part of that group (voluntarily or not), then soon enough their primary identity will shift to being members of said group and they will start to 'stick together' to weather the situation.>/i>

This is precisely the point, to treat somebody based on his/her belonging to a social group is not necessarily to discriminate but that is easily claimed when one is searching for a grievance.

Bint, you think way too much, get some sleep...

M,

That was not my point. So, since you didn't get it, let me rephrase:

If society reduces its treatment of members of a group based on said (voluntary or not) membership, then the group members will more & more perceive themselves to be primarily AS such group members & see themselves and their situation within society based on this reduced, simplistic group identity. If society THEN also discriminates against that group ...

And it seems that, increasingly, Muslims in the UK feel they get pushed into such a situation. Real or imagined? I don't know.

Actually, I am not sure if the "treatment of someone based on a perception reduced to a certain social group" alone isn't already almost automatically leading to discrimination.

THAT was/is/continues to be my "point".

--MSK*

MSK

Actually, I am not sure if the "treatment of someone based on a perception reduced to a certain social group" alone isn't already almost automatically leading to discrimination.

If you invited me for dinner and made provisions for having both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks (in case I didn't drink) and made sure that some of the food didn't have pork products in it, just in case; is that automatically leading to discrimination?

Better comparison: New kid in class, everybody be very careful with her, because she's very special, and not like you others.

My money's on the bullies.

Hmmm, tough one, I personally am fortunate in that I do not recall being singled out for being 'different', (unless you count by my own society)in a bullying, intimidating kind of way (customs officers are monkeys in uniform so it doesn't upset me much) but am not short-sighted enough to imagine that it doesn't exist especially in inner-city London.

I suppose faith based violent gangs (a soft euphemism for budding terrorists ripe for the picking) are the contemporary equivalent of black 'hoodie' gangs which are trying to assert their identity through violence against a society in which they find themselves marginalised.

Re MSK*'s point about lookg for faults, I also said what we do not share is a belief in a common legitimate (or perceived to be) cause.

Alle, much cheers, MH, cheers as well (I think)..

Oddly enough I flew into London the day after the fireball nonsense, but since I'm light-skinned, coming from an EU country, and the holder of a favorable passport, my interrogation at immigration control consisted of a brief, light-hearted discussion of the weather. Locals seemed more concerned about all the rain that they were getting rather than the clueless terrorists who thought they could cause an explosion by setting petrol on fire.

I suspect a lot of the difference between yourself and Ibrahim is the fact that you've got a stake in the broader (Western) society and have for the most part been accepted by that society while Ibrahim has not had those luxuries. Someone who is making good money, feels fulfilled by one's place and activity in society, and who hasn't been subjected to major discrimination or harassment by Western society or westerners is not likely to see one's Muslim-ness as overly distinctive from one's non-Muslim but otherwise similar peers.

For someone like Ibrahim who grew up poor, with no connections to the broader society, and no sense of fulfillment, it's only natural for him to seek out support groups where he can feel a part of something and feel some sense of purpose in his life. His local gang was his first attempt at this, but when this didn't work out so well he switched to a different sort of gang, a religion. I find it telling the similarity between how he reacted to beefs against his gang in the past and how he claims to react to beefs against his religion in the present. Islam gives him what the old gang tried but could not deliver: a sense of belonging and purpose that, because of his class and race, he was and is unable to feel in broader British society. It's easy for him to feel separate from British society because unlike you, he is a dark skinned young male(instantly suspicious), he is poor, and he grew up in a bad neighborhood(I'm assuming you didn't, apologies if I'm wrong). I doubt Ibrahim feels much catharsis in shopping, what can he do when he needs that release?

Now, obviously the guys who tried to pull off the latest round of terror attacks were not poor, they were doctors and the like. It seems to me that they still felt no connection or satisfaction with British society for other reasons(being non-white, non-Christian, identifying more with Iraqis than with Brits, etc.). One can feel alienated without being poor, such is the power of race, culture, and general brain chemistry.

The amusing thing is that I've actually overheard something similar to "We Christians should stick together," in the USA no less. Nowhere in the world do Christians have more sway than in the US, but they still feel persecuted because they don't get their way 100% of the time and because there's so much sin going on around them, despite the nominal Christianity of the vast majority of Americans. If Christians can feel put upon and thus feel a need to draw ranks even in Christian America, it's no wonder that some Muslims in Britain will also over-inflate the perceived threat from the broader society.

The Muslim specifics aside, the conversation sounds like something African-Americans have every 35 seconds in the USA, in a more secular identity way.

Yeah,

what MH & Djuha said ...

M,

if I invited you to dinner & made dietary provisions (although I could've just asked you beforehand) and then, throughout the evening, interacted with you just within the "she's a Muslim" paradigm - that would be discriminatory.

In any case, in my post I didn't talk about single incidents but "group treatment". I think MH's example with African-Americans in the U.S. is right on the mark. Ditto for non-white French in France.

So you aren't discriminated against on a personal level. Mabruuk. I'm happy for you. And I'm sure there are loads of Muslims who share your experience. There are also loads of others who share Ibrahim's. As the saying goes "Only 'cause you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out there to get you."

BS,

I got the difference re: cause. But that's extraneous to my post. Basically, while I also would've found that bus conversation interesting, it wouldn't have caused such a strong emotional reaction in me as it apparently did in you. AND it seems to me (and that's just an impression which, if wrong, you can easily correct) that your reaction was based more on your own internal debate about your own position as a Muslim in today's UK.

--MSK*

MSK

Maybe you are right, maybe I am suffering from (as pointed out by MH)the Muslim guilt equivalent of being a black man with a job unable to shake the guilt of selling out.

BS,

I never said it was about having a job & being unable to shake the guilt of selling out. And, if I may say so, you damn well know that.

And again, it was just an impression, based on this here your paragraph (which, btw, was one of the less beautiful & more muddled ones):

As I walked home I examined my position, wondering whether my political apathy had me sleepwalking into ignorant self-preservation and reactionism or whether my alarm in the face of any assertion of solidarity against ‘the other’, was not only understandable but also fair. Defaulting into backing some vague subliminal concept of Muslim solidarity in the face of some monolithic faceless ‘threat’ is the refuge of the weak argument, but is automatically assuming it is a bad thing an inevitable reaction in this day and age?

Maybe I'm completely off the mark - hence my careful phrasing a few posts above.

--MSK*

is this entire thread about impressions?

BS just said that she agreed with you, and then said that (MH - I guess matthew hogan) had implied the bit about guilt - but I'm wondering if the lesson in all of this is about how we read things - BS listened to two people having a conversation on a bus, and one of them was rather indiscreet (Islamically, I'm sure his wife wouldn't appreciate his discussing indiscretions, particularly if he mentioned her); and yet, I don't see what they said that was inappropriate to them.

All communities must have a sense of integrity to survive - he spoke only about the felt need to defend his religion and his family, and though he comes from a rough youth, these aren't concerns far from the heart of, say, the Conservative Party of England. Conservative commentators speak about the same all the time - and it's only natural for thousands of communities which worry about losing their language, culture, and religious identities in a Western "melting pot" to emphasize identity - the question being where do they build bridges and realize their debt to the broader community, or at least their interdependency?

What's true for families or small groups is true for nations as well, and I do wonder at why we're making so much out of these kids - I read nothing above that inclined me to think that these kids were terrorists, I know that there ethnic and cultural communities all around the Western world where kids talk about these issues, and it's only extreme alienation, a sense of failure of alternatives, and sponsorship or apathy from irresponsible elders which causes them to do something violent.

Let's keep our sense of perspective, yeah?

D,

That's mainly my point re: those two guys on the bus. HOWEVER, seen within the context of the last years - cartoon protests & the like - a sentence like "We need to stick together, the only thing these days that would get me worked up, is if anyone insults my religion or my family." of course has more significants than if, say, a Finn were to say "I get worked up if anyone were to insult my country."

--MSK*

I'm anti-terrorist (or 'anti-Salafi jihadi' if you like), and have zero sympathy for those who protested violently or threatened to kill those who criticized the muslim community (the cartoon protests were ironic, in many ways: "You called my community irrational and violent? I'll show you irrational and violent!") - but that's hardly true of all muslims.

I myself am muslim, european in extraction, and from an anglo-Christian background - and frankly, I'm disturbed at the level of xenophobia and nativism exhibited by all the communities to which I 'belong' - but by far the most militant are the FOX/ Savage Nation groups, which actually belong to military and para-military organizations. I think the majority of muslims, as angry as they are, are essentially peaceful people... and I say that with full conviction, believing that those groups which don't, including al-Muhajiroun and the abu Hamza lunatic fringe, should be policed firmly.

I remember speaking with some British Foreign Office folk, who were chagrined about the agreements they had made and the degree to which they had welcomed militant and Islamist groups in the 80s, with the underlying 'gentlemans code' that England was off limits... but sorry, you 'made your bed, now lie in it.'

I also have made firm statements that those muslims, immigrants or native-born, who believe in violence against civilians (terrorism) should be immediately offered a one-way ticket to the war zone of their choice...

D,

I don't think that anyone here at Aqoul would disagree with you ...

--MSK*

I was agreeing with MSK, he was just being prickly.

This is crucial dawud:-

where do they build bridges and realize their debt to the broader community, or at least their interdependency?

There is maintaining your identity and co-exisiting, and there ringfencing your identity by pitting yourself against those that are different, thas is the disturbing question.

BS,

Sometimes it's tough to recognize if something's said sarcastically or not.

And since I seem to have scuppered my chances for dinner with M, maybe you'd be up for it. I promise to have a special halal section ...

--MSK*

I don't think I implied or stated, or even thought, anything about guilt.

Just simply, that it seems to me that the conversation, allowing for religious identity and certain carry-over old world and Muslim-specific themes (insults to religion and family), has the same focus as alot of African-American and other ill-treated groups do -- let's straighten our lives out, I did thanks to the brothers who cared, let's get away from gangs, defend our own, and quit fighting amongst ourselves.

MSK*

Thanks for the offer but I don't take M's leftovers...

B,

Everybody is somebody else's "leftover".

Heek al-dinya.

Well, at least I asked. It'd've been a shame not to.

--MSK*