Part 1 (Introduction): A Review of the Casey review (1)
Part 2: A Review of the Louise Casey Review (2) – A Paper Influenced by the Transatlantic Neocon Hate-network
Having established the influence of the transatlantic neocon hate network in the Casey Review, and in order to better appreciate the content of the report, it is worth better understanding the neoconservative narrative which underpins the Casey Review.
The Far-Right/Neocon Eurabia Conspiracy Theory
The reduction of the “white population”, Muslim population growth, and Muslims living together in areas, are sinisterised constituents of a particular narrative which states there is an existential Muslim “takeover” threat to Europe aided by a secretive deal between Arabs and Europeans. This narrative was first promulgated by conspiracy theorist Gisèle Littman, better known by her pen-name Bat Ye’or. The myth has been heavily criticised as a conspiracy theory and debunked by prominent scholars including Professor Arun Kundnani, who has likened its evidentiary credentials to the Protocols of Elders of Zion.
The conspiracy theory, however, has been adopted by neoconservatives and the far-right, including prominent actors of the Islamophobia industry Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes and Pamela Geller. It has been advocated by supremacist neoconservatives, fanned by the far-right “counter-jihad” movement, and adopted by paranoid, mass-murdering neo-Nazi terrorists. For full details of this myth and its promoters see here.
Since I last touched on the topic of child abuse, there have been many further reports on this despicable, sickening crime. From doctors to priests, and more (to which I will come to later), all have been notably white, and non-Muslim, yet the press and the media gurus have not sought it fit to feed hatred, xenophobia and racism by highlighting these attributes and insinuating an intrinsic link between race/religion and the crime in such cases. Identity politics is a fantastic way to beat down minorities, not so much when it starts affecting the establishment.
And indeed the establishment connection to paedophilia has become a scandal.
Signs of a Paedophilic MP?
There have been a couple of reports which demonstrate differing methods of dealing with child abuse. On the one hand there are calls being made for children to be taught how to avoid child abuse. The other involves the police looking for “signs of paedophilia”. Durham police force have put 400 officers through the Intervene to Protect a Child (IPC) programme developed in the US. The signs include certain tattoos, clothes and even books.
The question is, how will children protect themselves from those who hold a public office yet actively cover-up such crimes in government? And what signs will be exhibited by the suited and booted who are part of the ever-suppressed, deflected and down-played Westminster paedophile ring?
Attacks because of one’s faith or race, or any other identifying feature is unacceptable. It is dehumanising, and very often for the victim, traumatising. The perpetrators too, can be victims; victims of their own ignorance which is exasperated by stereotypes reinforced in the media and government officials. Instead of fighting stereotypes, and challenging xenophobia, our government has institutionalised xenophobia, a necessary ingredient for hate-crimes and manufacturing consent for draconian policies.
As such I was happy to see Theresa May and other neocons mourning the increases in attacks against the Jewish community, even though the claims which prompted Theresa May’s reassurance were from a study which the Institute of Jewish Policy Research slammed as “littered with flaws”, with the conclusions being “dubious”, “irresponsible” and “incendiary”. Nevertheless, it was befuddling to see the comparative silence on the rise of attacks against the Muslim community, not just in the UK, but across Europe. Instead, the rhetoric around the Muslims continued to assign blame to the Muslim community, calling on them to “do more”, and therefore reinforcing the far-right narrative that the Muslim minority is inherently to blame for every and any attack perpetrated anywhere in the world. It abhorrently played Muslims off the Jewish community, in a similar fashion to the political opportunism displayed in David Cameron’s Chanuka speech.
Key senior figures are clearly not interested anti-Muslim hate crime. Tell MAMA, headed by the opportunistic Fiyaz Mughal, was set up as a government initiative. Once the Foreign Office had published its 2013 report on Human Rights and lionised the fact that the Muslim minority had a comforting arm of the government cuddling the Muslim minority, Tell MAMA’s funding was promptly pulled.
An interesting exchange which can be listened too here with James O’Brien in which the demand for apology from Muslim is comprehensively deconstructed. For those who want to dig a little deeper, the notion of “identity” of a community and its underlying assumptions were reciprocated to expose the caller’s inherent bias. Simply put, one wouldn’t ask another community to do the same. Singling out Islam and Muslim is discriminatory and xenophobic. As an example, see the reactions to Rupert Murdoch’s incrimination of all Muslims. As already highlighted in the social sphere, racism is a social contruct which moulds, changes and reemerges in different guises, yet the underlying xenophobia remains the same. A quote from a previous blog written on xenophobia, is most apt:
Anti-Muslim Backlash has Begun
As the world now knows, three masked men stormed Charlie Lebdo offices killing 12 employees including four cartoon artists a few days ago. As I write this, they are still at large leaving a trail of damage.
As is the norm now, Muslim organisations have come out condemning the action. Nevertheless the discourse rapidly focussed on two key areas, which are typically only discussed in the Muslim context.
Free Speech and Propaganda
Reading statements from politicians and emotionally-charged papers defending “free speech”, the fact that free speech is not absolute, is continually ignored. The right to life is an absolute non-derogable right. Thus balancing the two rights in the human rights discourse would mean giving way to one when the two are in jeopardy. This is not something new. Balancing competing rights happens every day in the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights. Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights restrictions may be imposed on freedom of expression “for the respect of the reputations and rights of others”, and protection of national security, public order, health and morals.
Napoleon once said that there are only two factors which unite men: fear and self-interest
In an interview with the Standard and returning from his tour from Malaysia, Boris Johnson seemed to present a slightly moderate demeanour to the discourse on immigration. But as they say the devil is in the detail. Britain should have a welcoming policy towards working migrants he suggested, but it is part of human nature to be xenophobic and that those who were afraid of foreigners were “not bad people”.
Without getting into a debate as to whether xenophobia is intrinsically innate, it is well established that the usual motivators for xenophobia are among other things economic distress, increased nationalism and nativism, and of course pressures related to immigration. These are external factors, not innate ones, incidentally which are in the control of the present government. Furthermore, xenophobia is a tendency which can be very easily triggered.
The attempt at normalising xenophobia (xenophobes are not “bad people”) glosses over the seriousness of the phenomenon itself. Xenophobia is “bad”. To understand the gravity of normalising xenophobia, one needs to grasp the potentially violent manifestation of it.
Xenophobia is a phenomenon which involves prejudicial treatment experienced by the “alien”. It is an irrational fear in the context of people who are different in some way. In the present British context, the manifestation of this irrational fear towards the Muslim minority has become most acute. With reports of increased attacks on Muslims (in particular Muslim women), the discriminatory targeting through government officials and organs, coupled with research which highlights the Muslim minority as the most discriminated when it comes to job opportunities, it would be no exaggeration to say that xenophobia, epistemologically irrational and inherently, usefully deflective of “real issues” (corporate tax havens, government corruption/cover-ups, poverty), is most visible in the experiences of the Muslim minority of Britain.