Skip to content or view screen version

UK left refusal to debate about right-wing Islam

erg | 23.03.2010 14:00

In light of the debate on the tactics of UAF in response to the rise of the EDL, here is something I wrote earlier about the left's refusal to be critical about right-wing Islam and not make the distinction between left-wing Islam and right-wing Islam

UK left refusal to debate = censorship & stereotype posturing
08.03.2010 01:38

Having attended a meeting at Houseman's Book Shop Sat evening in Kings Cross, on 'Feminism & Consumerism', I can inform on the fact that according to the reactionary left including SWP members and non-members (esp Chris Nineham), in raising the issue of whether or not the burka symbolically represents the regression of women's advances in equality and self-determination, that the majority of people living in the UK probably consider the burka to be a regression in feminist equality, and that how the left in giving support for members of oppressed communities such as the muslim community should do so critically, these questions and viewpoints are all attacks on muslims.....

This amounts to a non-freedom of speech amongst those who consider themselves the gatekeepers on the political platform of the left. To reasonably question whether the left should be critical in it's giving of support to those in need of it when they fall short of the standards we expect and demand of ourselves in terms of reversing patriarchical relations and whether toleration of religious identity should be met with toleration of the good conduct and standards of what we consider to be the hallmarks of a free and open democratic society, is it not right to question the strictures of a faith in which some of it's followers justify man's right to enact punishment of his wife in the home? Is it not ridiculous for the left to at one time extol the virtues of the advance in women's liberation and the same time deny there is any need to discuss whether a particular religious stricture denies core progressive values of equality in it's conception and continued practice and how the left should be open to have a proper free debate on this?

My opinion is that it's better to have an open and honest debate about these issues, than not to have one, because of fear of upsetting a community relied upon for a large base of your political support. In having an open, intelligent debate instead of limiting the parameters of debate from the outset, one can more easily reach a position whereby one might better understand both sides of the argument. The counterbalance to the view just expressed takes account of the excesses of modern western consumerist culture in tandem with female liberation as being a debasing influence on moral ethics to which Islam moral stricture is a refuge, best articulated in the following quote by Naomi Wolf: “Many Muslim women I spoke with did not feel at all subjugated by the chador or the headscarf. On the contrary, they felt liberated from what they experienced as the intrusive, commodifying, basely sexualizing Western gaze. … Many women said something like this: …’how tiring it can be to be on display all the time. When I wear my headscarf or chador, people relate to me as an individual, not an object; I feel respected.’ This may not be expressed in a traditional Western feminist set of images, but it is a recognizably Western feminist set of feelings.”

Phyllis Chesler takes issue with this point of view, arguing the justification of a practice which denies women's right to exist in their own right is a step backwards. Others argue it is a practice which excuses oppression and that Wolf's point of view is nonsensical given that at the other extreme of wholehearted devotion to Islamic stricture, the reality is unjustifiable in oppressed nations and oppressive families in the west, where forced marriages, wife beating, daughter killing, honour killing and child brides are all acceptable practices. Women who say they are happy to wear the burkah are, at best, making a virtue out of necessity, and at worst under threat of honour killing.
 http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/08/31/the-burqa-the-ultimate-feminist-choice/

erg

Comments

Hide the following 13 comments

Imperilled Muslim women, dangerous Muslim men and civilised Europeans

23.03.2010 15:19

Since the time of the crusades, with not a brief detour via colonialism, Islam and its adherents have been cast as the strange and deviant other, the polar opposite to the reasonable and civilized West. Such prejudice has been normalised further / again in a post-9/11 social landscape. Rhetoric focuses on the barbarity, brutality and oppressiveness that is Islam, and the bodies of women form the battlefield on which this verbal crusade is waged. Anti-Muslim prejudice is increasingly subsumed and hidden behind a concern for women. The discourse around gender-based practices such as veiling, forced marriages and honour killings reveal the ways in which expressions of Islamophobia have become normalised and neutralised through a juxtaposition of traditions of patriarchy and gender inequality within Islam and counter traditions of gender equality in the West. The discourse unquestioningly reinforces the idea that Islam is oppressive to women, homogenising and generalising such oppression as representative of the whole rather than as specific to the few. It allows for the silencing of the voices of Muslim women while simultaneously proclaiming a desire to free them from such silencing. A facade of concern for gender equality facilitates the institutionalization of Islamophobic norms...

(Apologies for academic language - shameless ripoff of a recent article)

the crusade over the bodies of women


UK left is always slagging off religion

23.03.2010 15:28

Not sure where this "refusal to debate" comes from - it seems to me that the UK left is always (justifiably) slagging off religions. They just don't restrict it to Islam, unlike the EDL bigots.

You get a few radical ploughshares type religious people but on the whole I would say the UK left is overwhelmingly atheist and critical of religion.

anon


Re: Imperilled Muslim women

23.03.2010 15:35

And a great discourse it is too. I find it odd how these EDL types and a few ex-antifa members, both the epitome of macho politics (from different sides) and who have F.A. to do with feminism suddenly come out the woodwork proclaiming their long held concerns for women's liberation.

A


to 'A'

23.03.2010 17:20

I'm genuinely curious as to how 'antifa' is macho. Not being a member I am keen to understand what you mean, I myself do not have a clear political identity other than a sense that self defense is paramount, as is a sense of community/unity. I think this situation is forcing some of us to wake up to the fact that things are changing possibly quite quickly and we need to develop community cohesion some how rather than get dragged into messy street fights with opportunists and the police. All these things keep coming up, I am conscious of my own responsibility to question what these words mean; 'religion', 'right', 'left' and all the terms for political affiliation. I would say we should all be free as long as our actions don't impose on the freedom of others so debates about religious affiliations are to some extent unneccessary, a distraction from whether individuals can be deemed to be controlling or submitting to others... I realise I become contradictory... But then the issues at stake aren't all straight forward for example women with veils are able to protect their identity and therefore personal freedom in a way that most of us now or not as the police must well realise means we can and will be targeted my militant fascists. I appreciate the debate as well as acknowledging the need for action. Highly publicised street confrontations are to some extent doomed(as well as being possibly neccessary to prevent free reign for the fash), we need positive assertions of what we have in common rather than emphasising our differences and to acknowledge the need for self defence.
I know the intentions of most UAF good but there is a massive contradiction between wanting the fascists off the street, deeming the police as obstructive to this aim while at the same time relying on them to protect anti fascists from the fascists. We're all preaching to the converted to some extent I suppose and need to be leading by example in our communities to engender a sense of the need for self empowerment in every sense not just a theoretical sense or a we're going to pretend to be revolutionaries, shout a few chants and then get indignant when the police show bias/rough us up/arrest us up/don't play fair/call for 'bans' while complaining of suppressed freedom of association

pro personal freedom lifer


Oh my God and the State

23.03.2010 21:41

Erg claims that there is a "refusal to debate about right-wing Islam". His evidence for this is that he went to "a meeting at Houseman's Book Shop" at which Chris Nineham (ex SWP) argued against attacks on the Burkha. Where is the lack of debate? There is a difference between refusing to debate and agreeing with your opinion.

It is a bit problematic for men to debate the clothing of women. The liberation of women shall be the action of the women themselves. If someone is telling a woman what to wear he is attacking her freedom. That is true both of the EDL and presumably of some muslims. I've never seen anyone forcing a woman to wear the Burkha but if I did she would be sure of my support. This is really an issue for Muslim women rather than male Atheists.

There are some horrible Right-Zionist Jews in the EDL. They are seeking to build a radical wing of the Israel lobby; using Islamophobia to campaign for increasing state powers in Israel & the UK.

The police & the EDL should be understood as closely related interest groups; both want a stronger state.

 http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bakunin/godandstate/godandstate_ch1.html

When we put on a mask we liberate ourselves from CCTV


re: If someone is telling a woman what to wear he is attacking her freedom

23.03.2010 23:27

"It is a bit problematic for men to debate the clothing of women. The liberation of women shall be the action of the women themselves. If someone is telling a woman what to wear he is attacking her freedom."

I don't think anyone here is saying women should be banned from wearing burkhas if they want to. The whole point is that in certain religions it is essentially compulsory. Even if it isn't illegal to not wear one it would be enforced by social pressure and.or violence.

It's religions that are telling women what to wear, atheists and anarchists/leftists are saying wear whatever you want.

anon


Fuck the rightwing

24.03.2010 02:09

OK, have to start off by saying that i feel a little uncomfortable talking about this being a man (or self identifying as a man if you prefer).
Are Burkas more or less objectifying then mini skirts? I have a feeling that in the "spice girls culture", we aren't as advanced as we'd like to think we are, sure women can vote and drive, but in many other ways they are more objectified here then in the Muslim world. We have these euro-centric ideas of values that we'd like to enforce on everyone, but we're not really living up to them here.

if instead of saying you should do this, or that, we'd listen to the progressive voices in the Muslim world and support them in their struggles for self liberation... well i don't know, we might find that Burkas aren't such a big issue for many, we might find some people saying that forced marriages are better then single teenage mums, we might find this or not, but we shouldn't be dictating the path of liberation, we should be supporting them in doing it for themselves, without taking the lead role.

I am not defending right wing Islam, it is a disease, and the right wing is a disease that plagues all societies and should be cured urgently. and it so happens that we end up marching hand in hand with (some) right wing Muslims in peace protests, and this should stop, they call it radical Islam, i prefer religious fundamentalists, these are the destructive forces that stop social progress in every society (yet they promote technological progress... go figure)

It's well and nice to say you shouldn't have to dress this or that way, but in effect in our society we put women in exactly the same dilemma, dress this way, act this way, and define yourself as an object for man, or you will be an outcast. (I'm not gonna go into the expectations put on man here, but there are those too).

but the fact is, that the state and the EDL made Muslim fundamentalism an issue here, which it really isn't, while there might be a few nutters calling for strict Sharia law to be implemented here (does anyone know what Sharia law actually is, 'cause all I know is from wikipedia), but does anyone actually think we're in danger of having Sharia law enforced here? if they do then they are as much of a nutcase as those who promote it.

Hey look at all these sexist Muslim man, aren't they horrible? how they objectify their women? we'll I think you're objectifying those women by assuming they can't speak for themselves and need you to defend them.

too long now, tired, need to go to bed,

gud'night


good ol' indymedia

24.03.2010 20:37

"(or self identifying as a man if you prefer)"
Only on Indymedia

sappht


Radical Islam IS right wing. MI5 are the problem however.

25.03.2010 00:05

Have a good think

anon


more comments please..

25.03.2010 01:08

this is a very interesting discussion

anarchafeminist


how about a discussion at Oct bookfair on this one?

25.03.2010 18:31

Perhaps an Anarcha feminist could organise a discussion on this topic at this year's bookfair? Talk with hosts at Houseman's Book Shop in Kings X if you do.

The discussion I referred to at Houseman's actually took place 3 weekends ago, not last saturday as I printed above.

Chris Nineman was not a speaker at this debate (Lindsey German was, and the views highlighted above can equally be attributed to her). The views of Chris Nineman were ascertained in a one-to-one conversation between me and him after the discussion.


erg


Vladmir Lenininsky Trotskyvinivitchski.

25.03.2010 20:27

The Left is an athiest entity and so is 'excluded' from understanding acts of emancipation as conducted by women who consider themselves to be pious enough to hide their femininity, and therefore sexuality, from unwanted attention from single men from the same ethnic group. A 'pious' women who wears the Burkha is often married and resents the unwanted attention from 'unpious' men of the same ethnic group.

'Left-wing' feminists, by pressuring muslim women to surrender this habit, force upon muslim women the prospect of marital failure and pressure which the Burkha-wearing muslim women considers a threat to her own piety and moral well-being. Commonly, the 'Left' is routinely perceived to be 'extending' itself onto the muslim woman and this is percieved, on the receiving end, to be oppresive and confrontational.

While the religious text of the Koran does not explicilty demand the wearing of the Burkha per se, the muslim women is likely to 'translate' elements of its content to her own reality and situation, thereby allowing her, and her peers, to re-format the texts meaning and impact across generations. This translation is not possible from an 'athiest' perspective, which tends to rely on 'scientific literalism' and alter-revisionism to propagate written text across generations.

The 'athiest Left' is therefore unable to revise knowledge over time and this propagates a rigid history absent the flexibilty needed to adapt to the changing of other cultures and moral standards that it encounters over time. By this process, the 'Left' becomes segmented and isolated undermining its ability to communicate properly as the world around it 'moves on'.

For the emancipated and empowered muslim woman, the 'left' is a symptom of itself.

Next week, Why can't dogs look up!

Gone in 60 Seconds.


re: pressuring muslim women to surrender this habit

27.03.2010 00:33

@Vladmir Lenininsky Trotskyvinivitchski:

"'Left-wing' feminists, by pressuring muslim women to surrender this habit, force upon muslim women the prospect of marital failure and pressure which the Burkha-wearing muslim women considers a threat to her own piety and moral well-being."

I think you are attacking a straw (wo)man. I don't see many people saying women should be banned from wearing a burkha if they genuinely want to. It's just that it should be a genuine informed choice, without the threat of any form of punishment if they don't want to.

If people want to wear bikinis, fine. If they want to wear burkhas, fine. But a free choice, please.

anon