I can think of all manner of intriguing discussions could be sparked off by this report in the UK Sunday Times:
MORE than 14,000 white Britons have converted to Islam after becoming disillusioned with western values, according to the first authoritative study of the phenomenon.
Some of Britain’s top landowners, celebrities and the offspring of senior Establishment figures have embraced the strict tenets of the Muslim faith.
The trend is being encouraged by Muslim leaders who are convinced that the conversion of prominent society figures will help protect a community stigmatised by terrorism and fundamentalism.
The new study by Yahya (formerly Jonathan) Birt, son of Lord Birt, former director-general of the BBC, provides the first reliable data on the sensitive subject of the movement of Christians into Islam. He uses a breakdown of the latest census figures to conclude that there are now 14,200 white converts in Britain.
Speaking publicly for the first time about his faith this weekend, Birt, whose doctorate at Oxford University is on young British Muslims, argued that an inspirational figure, similar to the American convert Malcolm X for Afro-Caribbeans, would first have to emerge if the next stage, a mass conversion among white Britons, were to happen.
The faith has made inroads into the Establishment. It emerged this weekend that the great-granddaughter of a British prime minister has converted. Emma Clark, whose ancestor, the Liberal prime minister Herbert Asquith, took Britain into the first world war, said: “We’re all the rage, I hope it’s not a passing fashion.”
I rather hope it is but my ambitions are irrelevant. The question is whether this is just a conversion du jour among people with a God-shaped hole in them or whether this is the start of Islam making serious inroads into native British society. If it is the latter then it certainly has some way to go. Out of a population of some 59 million or so, I don’t think a mere 14,200 could be called statistically significant.
The more interesting question for me is not in the number of conversions but the type and class of the converts. Assuming the article is accurate, the overwhelming majority of the converts are among (for want of a better term) the ‘rich and famous’. Now why is that, I wonder?
And just how different from the history of Christianity in these Islands which took hold in Roman Britain as very much a working-class movement and which filtered up to the ruling elites.
The article contains a tantalising clue:
Many converts have been inspired by the writings of Charles Le Gai Eaton, a former Foreign Office diplomat. Eaton, author of Islam and the Destiny of Man, said: “I have received letters from people who are put off by the wishy-washy standards of contemporary Christianity and they are looking for a religion which does not compromise too much with the modern world.”
This makes it sound as if these people are seeking a refuge. Perhaps this growing interest in the Islamic faith is more a variation on the post-modern/anti-progress/green politics which appear to be popular among the the very same people. Who knows?
Having said all that, I think it reasonable to at least postulate that the collpase of the Church of England has got something to do with this. From being the bedrock of national faith and the morally certain religion of empire, the CofE has shrivelled into a comically ludicrous NGO presided over by an Arch-Hippy. In other words, it has gone and shot all its own credibility in the head and is no longer in any position to offer anything to people for whom DVD players and all-night shopping are not enough.
Because of this decline, a lot of people rather assume that Britain is a post-religious country that has abandoned faith and embraced secularism as the national doctrine. But maybe that is not so. Maybe the ruination of the Church of England has simply left a vacuum waiting to be filled and a great spiritual thirst needing to be slaked.
Where Islamic clerics score IMO is they provide leadership and are decisive: THIS is right; THAT is wrong etc. Contrast this with the wooly-ness of the Church of England; compare this with the Protestant Church in Northern Ireland as exemplified by Rev Dr Ian Paisley. The typical English cleric I’ve encountered is an equivocal, vacillating, drip; they try to be liked by everyone and as a result get respected by no-one. The CoE has forgotten that its main purpose is not to be overtly religious but to offer moral and societal leadership. They’ve failed so people are looking elsewhere.
As I’ve posted here before, this is the ultimate result of the attacks on Western values and Western society that the Cultural Marxists have been waging continuously on us for 40-45 years.
The ultimate beneficiaries are not Marxist revolutionaries as the Cultural Marxists hoped, but Islamists. Of course, since Islamists are by definition anti-Western, the Cultural Marxists don’t seem to care that much in the long run.
That said, Muslims are notorious for their exaggerations of convert numbers, delighting in especially claiming white Western converts. They also do not acknowledge that many of these converts later abandon Islam. I personally know at least a dozen Western converts to Islam who later abandoned the faith upon giving it a closer look; we hear little about these people (or apostates in general) because they are afraid of being harmed, even in the West, by Muslims who take seriously the sharia exhortation to kill apostates.
‘the CofE has shrivelled into a comically ludicrous NGO presided over by an Arch-Hippy.’
Truly an excellent summary. I will remember it.
Rest assured, there are also quite a few Muslims converting to Christianity in Europe and America, particularly Iranians and Algerians, but you won’t hear about it from the Cultural Marxist-dominated media. 1.) because the Cultural Marxists love to use Islam as a battering ram to destroy the west, so are very pro-Islam and 2.) because Muslim converts to Christianity fear for their lives, they are not exactly eager to talk about their experiences.
Last year a British Muslim convert to Christianity did have the courage to write about his conversion in the Times under his true name; he later moved to Australia to escape persecution and death threats.
It’s a celebrity fad. No more likely to bring down civilization than Beckham wearing a skirt.
Additional thought: as the established Christian churches move closer and closer to the demands of the Cultural Marxists, have you ever noticed how much more viciously the Cultural Marxists attack them? Look at the Anglican Community: it allows women priests, some segments are appointing gay bishops and blessing gay unions; its head spiritual leader adopts the Cultural Marsist line on all kinds of political issues such as the war in Iraq and the “root causes” of terrorism — yet this church receives absolutely no respect from the Cultural Marxists for these moves, only more derision, ridicule and contempt. Meanwhile Islam — which is so far from the supposed ideals of the Cultural Marxists that it is not even funny — is treated like a sacred cow by these self-same Cultural Marxists.
Over what period of time? How many Muslims have converted to Protestant groups, Catholic or Orthodox? This has no apparent statistical significance in a nation with the population of the UK. Much ado about nothing with some other relevant statistics. (Have reread the post twice and am NOT paying for accident to the Times article but I see few of the most basic questions addressed.) Is this “a lot?” How much would “a lot” be? Does not compute.
What is “Cultural Marxists” ?
A Marxist “cultural” ? Maybe you mean “cultural” marxists ?
A marxist is a marxist. No need for additional adjectives.
The numbers may seem insignificant, but this is something that I have suspected for some time. The Christian churches are no longer useful to the ruling elites. I think that they would like to see a gradual Islamization in Europe, why else would the French, who still expunge English words from their language, have such a sacred cow in Islam? Or the BBC? Islam is like Medieval Christendom and could keep them in power. Democratic systems won’t do that, or the free market. This is why they allow such populist drivel like “social marxism” and the rest of that nonsense to proliferate – in state controlled media- and who controls the state? They must have a vested interest in this or it would be squashed.
The numbers may seem small, but this is something that I have suspected for some time. The Christian churches are no longer useful to the ruling elites. I believe that they would like to see a gradual Islamization of Europe – why else would the French, who still expunge English words from their language, have such a sacred cow in Islam? Or the BBC? This is why they tolerate – or even encourage all this populist drivel like “social marxism”. This is from the state controlled media – and who controls the state? Islam is like 12th century Medieval Christendom and can keep them in power, if they play their cards right. Democracy or the free market won’t do that. I think that this is just the tip of the iceberg, not because the rest of the population is interested in conversion, but because in 30 years you may have no choice.
I didn’t notice any real breakdown of the convert population. I suspect that a significant fraction of the newly-Moslem horde resides as a guest of the state. In the USA, the prisons are hotbeds of Islamic proselytizing and conversion of both black and white. The effects are generally short-lasting.
It is a non-issue for me as I suspect far more people just give up on religion altogether in Britain than converting to a different one. We are a vastly secular country so I really do not plan to lose any sleep over a few people with (as David puts it) a ‘God shaped hole in them’ heading off in Allah’s direction. Most people are in reality choosing ‘none of the above’.
I think you might want to be concerned if these converts begin suicide bombing and what not.
Converts are usually “more Catholic than the Pope” to use a phrase, and that may be worrisome in the long run.
Here where I live in the US, there are a fair number of black muslims, but as that’s more of a fashion statement than anything else, I’m not put out about it. People like John Walker Lindt are much more problematic and worrying.
The Sunday Times are obviously receptive to pro-muslim copy, to pay for the editorial sins of the last few weeks: got to have balance, and all that. But this is an empty space. Research on census data ain’t worth anything. “When did you last convert to Mohammedanism?” was not on the sheet.
I suspect (but don’t have Census data to prove it) that “conversion” mainly involves marriage of native British women to muslim men. This is strictly a one-way option. In the other direction, its just too dangerous. The “Death to…” boys have seen to that.
In Reply To Above
But if the numbers seem “small” or “insignificant” then any conclusions you’re drawing from them are purely speculative and have no meaning.
While this topic has stirred up some interesting speculation, that’s the only result. Let the Repbulicans, Tories, Christians et al speculate, but let us compute so that we can best understand the negative impact these assorted groups are having on personal freedoms.
compute = draw useful conclusions
Speculation, anectodal comments, and the lot serve what purpose? Color me pragmatic. 😉
“…a lot of people rather assume that Britain is a post-religious country that has abandoned faith and embraced secularism as the national doctrine.”
It looks more like natural theology than secularism. It has all the emotional salve and fuzzy thinking of old religion without the gods, a sort of ironic paganism.
This really isn’t surprising. Mainstream Protestant denominations in the US, such as Methodists and Episcopalians, having watered down their doctrine for years, are shedding members rapidly, to the advantage of more fundamentalist, evangelical Protestant sects. I don’t know the numbers, but I’m sure the gains in evangelical churches far outweighs however many native born Americans convert to Islam. As far as African American Muslims are concerned, a big chunk of them are not considered Muslim by Islamists.
Jacob: re: Cultural Marxists: I guess you had to be there.
WHO exactly are these so called rich and powerful top “celebrity” converts to Islam?
Can anyone give me a list?
Is Terry Wogan one of them, or maybe Jamie Oliver?
How about Gloria Hunniford, has she donned a burka and embraced Islam too?
And what’s Kylie’s religion these days? does any one know?
It’s such a progressive and “sexy” religion isn’t it? It’s got such great pulling power in the West.
I can see it now, all those hi-profile well known celebs queuing up around the block to join up to this new Mohammadian fad. Mmmmmm…. Islam. It’s like Rastafarianism but with Fatwas and Jihad.
All those ‘celeb’ converts to Islam are subliminally influencing me – I can feel the power of Islam calling me across the ether. Where can I join up? I want a big hairy beard and a towel on my head too. Those Talibannies as so COOL. Yeah baby. I too am dissolutioned with living in the free, democratic and secular West. I long for Sharia and a mysoginistic, totalitarian fundamentalist life in the Arab 11th century AD, just like Binny Boy and the Islamic terrorists want to. I say F*ck the West, give ME Islam NOW!
At this point 14200 is not a particularly large number. But if this trend continues, then conversions, along with the Muslim birth rate, will in 20 to 50 years time become a major issue, which tranzi liberals, whether leftist or libertarian, will no longer be able to ignore. When large areas of Britain are ruled by sharia, when stonings, attacks on Christians, Jews, Atheists and Pagans become common, and when Muslim political parties become significant power brokers in Parliament, it will cease being a “non issue”. But of course by then it will too late.
Tranzi libertarians who think religion and culture are just private affairs that have no bearing on politics are living in a fantasy world every bit as short shighted and shallow as tranzi socialists.
In the US, the more fundamentalist protestant denominations are profiting from the attacks on traditional values by the “Cultural Marxists” (I like that term).
It seems to be a sign of the times that people, especially young university educated people throw away most of the existing culture because they don’t see the value in it and are smarter than anyone in the past anyway. In the US, I think the 60s generation really got this trend going. In any case, the result is a values vacuum that many people need filled.
Also of note is the fact that the Catholic Church, which has been the only religion of Latin America for 500 years, has been rapidly replaced by the evangelical protestants. I think that “liberation theology” (sort of a Catholic Leninism), which became popular in the Latin American Catholic churches drove many people to the evangelicals.
In the US, a lot of angry blacks and prisoners convert to Islam. That trend is scary, because many of these folks already have a big chip on their shoulder, and could readily be persuaded to undertake suicide missions.
The questions are how many white women could stand Islamic laws, how many of them wanted to walk behind their men, how many of them wanted to be divorced by their men without recourse in the matter, how many of them wanted to lose their children in such a divorce. Look at it this way, if this conversion is not a fad, it may be a chance for these western women to introduce western ideas to bring the middle ages religion into the modern era.
My money is on fad. That a significant chunk of these people were getting into crystals 15 years ago, and have taken an Alpha course in the last decade. Converts of all sorts often just want to avoid having to think for themselves.
I note that Mr Yaya (git yer yayas out?) based his “conclusion” on the British census. How very amusing. I seem to recall far more people copped to being Jedi Knights at the last census.
I suspect just as many celebs , like Madonna, are now converts to the Kabbalah beliefs of Judaism.
The one point to worry about is if high-profile leftwingers start taking this road, as a form of piggybacking on the only violent revolution currently making headway in the West.
I use the “Jemima Khan” index.
“Her dress spoke for her. She had so far been seen covered from head to foot in a sari or salwar-kurta. But that evening she wore a beautiful short, sleeveless frock.”
Of course one should remember the Roman elite brought Christianity to Britain; then the local elite took it up and it went from there… then post-Roman invasion and the non-elites returning to the old ways just about wiped it out except in Wales and Ireland. The return to Christianity was imported both ways; to the elites via Rome and initially to the non-elites by the Celts.
Then we have the change to Protestantism which was pretty much done at sword point under Henry VIII’s orders.
So going for the elites is an historically tried and true way to convert if you believe in the State and Aristocracy and their ability to just ‘make it so’ among the unwashed masses.
However the 20th century has shown those masses sometimes fight back.
If I had anything in the bank I’d lay down a bet that if the conversions ever become a real threat to the religion of the mass of Britons, the Church Of England will either find a new backbone and a different generation of leadership or it will lose out to the Roman Catholic church and perhaps Presbyterians and others.
Force begets counter force. Yin and Yang create each other from nothingness.
Who knows? If CoE keeps this up there may be an RC restoration and queen in Englands future…
Now who was that Plantagenet guy in Australia….?
Susan, who knows what she is talking about, is correct in this. Many “converts” who “convert” not through conviction but through trendiness or because they want to marry a Muslim, aren’t aware that it is impossible to leave Islam once you’re in. The sentence for apostasy is death, and you don’t need a court of law to impose the sentence. Even if you divorce the Muslim you marry, you cannot revert to Christianity or even atheism. They’ll come after you.
L – The French are beginning to take a very strong stand against militant Islam in France. And they are not backing down in the face of standard boilerplate international condemnation.
Guy – Yes, Islam is the new Scientology! The only thing is, they can’t get out!
ic – Wha? “It may be a chance for Western women to introduce Western ideas” – presumably to those they enslave themselves to? You mean introduce Western ideas to the approximately 12m Muslims who have burrowed their way into Europe? Like, somehow, living in the West for two generations, Western ways have somehow escaped their attention? Hello? Half a billion normal people in the US and Europe have failed to “introduce” Western enlightenment and tolerance and make-over programmes on TV to Muslim immigrants, but a few thousand dimwit dhimmis are going to effect a sudden illumination through marriage?
Besides, what if the other three wives don’t agree?
At such moments I find myself torn. On the one hand vexing notions of the lightness of western being spring irresistible to mind. Have we really declined so far, become so very insubstantial that ANY religious faith, never mind one as troublesome and enslaving as Islaam, can carry us off like weak girls over the shoulders of a rampant invader? Nick Griffin, your time has come.
On the other hand, perhaps news like this is an anti-viral serum in the English bloodstream. We may yet need a larger dosage to bring us up short and start questioning the direction of immigration policy.
14,000 converts isn’t good. But it isn’t a national trend either. It will be a while yet before we know what, if anything, it will amount to. Meanwhile, I hope Guy’s right and all that’s happening is that the crystal sellers have lost 14,000 of their best customers.
Although, Guy, if we’re right and these are all people who formerly put their faith in New Age crystals and Mayan re-birthing ceremonies, can Carole Caplan be far behind? And where walks Carole in her pixie boots, there walks Cherieeeee.
I think 14,000 is totally insignificant. Most of them will have been converted by fellow guests of Her Maj, and the rest will be trendies
What will be most amusing is when one of these trendy converts tries to give up Islam. Can we expect to see a fatwa declared on him or her? I wonder if any of the numbnuts who converted to ROPMA actually read the fine print of their new religion? Or are these people joining some form of ROPMA-lite, like celebs who are becoming Jews in very-reformed temples in LA?
For the record, I have considered becoming a Jew at several times in my life. It may still happen…
Not with that bloke loitering about with a rusty carving knife it won’t.
Verity:
I would honestly be very keen on sharing your optimism but the confidence it requires suddenly vanish when I recall that, (thank to “Mister C.” and his SuperCop Nico Sarko), militant Islam of France is now officially recognised and institutionalized: the CFCM (French Council of the Muslim Cult) being its tribune with 26 elected members coming from fundamentalist Muslim associations against 8 “moderates”.
However, I assume you had in mind the ban on the veil in public schools (among other religious signs). Granted, this contested (to say the least) law has been voted.
Yet, as far as I’m informed, its application decree (that, in the French code, is essential for the law to be enforced) has not. And the French code is full of laws voted in the Assembly but still waiting for the decree and therefore not enforced. I imagine it’s almost famous for that (Should be anyway).
Oh well, the important thing here is to entertain the French and have them believe that the government is doing something against militant Islam. After all, there are elections coming up (including local ones next month) and we certainly don’t want the last presidential poll ‘tragedy’ to recur, do we?
In the meantime, the 70 000 forced weddings endured by young French girls from Muslim families every God forsaken years will go on.
But hey, at least they’re protected against wearing “ostensible religious” signs at school.
So as far as this question (and optimism) is concerned, I’m afraid I have to agree with Guy Millière, who wrote last Saturday:
There you have it. When it comes to serious and demanding issues, one should never forget (or underestimate) the ability of the French government(s) to posture and procrastinate, at least until it reaches the stage made so famous by Louis the XVIth and the Duke of Liancourt:
Dissident, I take all your points – especially the ones that were new to me! But all I can say is, when this bill was imminent, suddenly, after pretending for years that France didn’t have any religious problems, discussion of the headscarf and Islam dominated discussion shows and I must, they were nothing if not frank. They were far franker than anything you would see on British TV, that’s for sure.
Some of the angriest and most dismissive people were modern Muslim women – the hair, the makeup, the fashionable clothes, the sexy shoes – who thought the headscarf was divisive, backward and a sign of Islamic male authoritarianism.
I took it as all most encouraging. Now you’re saying it may never get onto the statute books … I don’t know, Dissident, it seems that the legislators know that the electorate wants it on the books and wants it enforced. Do you really think it won’t go forward?
Verity: It’ll be a very sad day at my gym when Carole turns up in a chador.
On the small print point, it would be interesting to know how many self-proclaimed converts have actually got as far as the kalimath, and how much is pure defiant pose.
Guy – Ha ha! OK, what’s the kalimath?
Sometimes my sesquipedalian prolixity runs away with me and I’m probably mis-spelling and mis-applying the word. I mean the shahada, the Arabic phrase pronouncing which (willingly and with intent) makes you a Muslim = “There is no God but Al-Lah, and Muhammad is His prophet.”
[Googles] Here we are. A sufi’s explanation.
Sometimes my sesquipedalian prolixity runs away with me and I’m probably mis-spelling and mis-applying the word. I mean the shahada, the Arabic phrase pronouncing which (willingly and with intent) makes you a Muslim = “There is no God but Al-Lah, and Muhammad is His prophet.”
[Googles] Here we are. A sufi’s explanation.
… and what I tell you three times is true.
Perry: I’m an athiest myself, but I learned the hard way that secularism is often no match for Islam. Moreover, whatever weapons secularism does have n the West, are trained fully at Christianity, not at Islam — therefore hindering the growth of one and helping the growth of the other. Islam flies under the radar, completely unchallenged by the same kind of ridicule and skepticism that has long been trained at Christianity. Part is from fear of being harmed by the Islamists and part is from fear of being harmed by the government thought police.
Frankly, if we have to have a dominant religious tradition in our society — and I’m beginning to think we do — I’d much rather have it be the religion of my ancestors for the past 1500 years or so rather than a completely alien tradition that requires one to change their name, pray in a foreign language and bow five times a day to an object in a foreign country.
Christianity is more than just a religion — it’s a culture and a tradition too. I like the society that the culture and traditions have produced.
Dave F: Your fears are not unfounded, but far behind the times. The Lefties have already started to embrace Islam as the hottest new anti-Western ideology, now that Communism is a non-starter. See Roger Garaudy, French, ex-Communist, now a convert to Islam. See Carlos “The Jackal” Ramirez, notorious Marxist-Leninist terrorist, now a convert to Islam (and author of a new book that sounds very much like liberation theology applied to Islam.)
Lots of others where those came from. Ibn Warraq printed a whole list of ex-Communists who had converted to Islam in his book, “Why I am Not a Muslim.”
Shawn, Verity, Guessedworker: Apropos of my post to Perry above, regarding secularisam, two articles that recently appeared in the Telegraph:
(Sorry but I don’t know how to put links in, so I’ll just quote from them):
From a story about a proposal by a Labour “think-tank” to teach UK schoolchildren about athiesm and other alternative religions:
“From the age of five, children should learn that there are people who do not believe in God, the afterlife, or the power of prayer or that the Universe was created,” the report says. “They should also be told from an early age of the alternatives to marriage and that there are non-religious ways of marking momentous experiences. A heavy emphasis would also be given to educating children about Islam to guard against what the think-thank regards as a growing phobia in schools towards Islam.” (Bold type face added.) The article goes on to describe how the children will be encouraged to criticize the Bible and decide if it is true or not, but it does not say that Muslim children will be similarly encouraged to “deconstruct” the Koran. (I doubt if they will be.)
Second article, from the Telegraph’s opinion piece on this proposal:
“How do they [the think tank experts] reconcile the desire to talk children out of their religious beliefs with their policy of genuflecting towards the cultural traditions of ethnic minorities, most of which are explicitly religious? It would be interesting to watch a right-on primary school teacher attempting to explain to a devout Muslim father why his child should investigate athiesm. But that is unlikely to happen. The proposals are not directed at Islam: the impulse behind them — like the decision to ban prayers from graduation ceremonies at Edinburgh University, which we report today — is anti-Christian rather than anti-religious.”
So there you have it — resolute secularisam for Christianity, abject reverence for Islam. That is the tranzi agenda — and that is “what’s happening here” according to the original Samizdata post. Under these types of policies do you expect Islam to win more converts or fewer?
BTW, this same trend is underway in the United States, where we have secularist watchdogs like the ACLU — which I used to admire — training its big guns at any manifestation of Christianity in public spaces, but whose big guns are curiously silent about manifestations of Islam in the public spaces.
Verity:
More than all, I believe France is at a convergence point between the deniers, the cynics and the conquering (militant, if you wish) Islam. I also believe that the power that be (whatever their churches, parties or factions) are stuck in the middle, prisoner of the stranglehold they carved for themselves. I think we’re about to attend the outcome of the so-called French “Arab politics”, thought out by de Gaulle and, er, expanded by Chirac (down to Saddam’s Baghdad among others), “spiced” with the settling of some of the old Algerian war accounts and the post 9/11 new deal of cards and threats.
I may be mistaking of course, but what I have seen of the debate in France was rather typical of the way serious issues had been… non-addressed, in this country for some time now. Watching a bunch of Socialists (of both the Left and the Right) beating around the bush to justify the ban on symbolic items instead of having an uncompromising take on what they do symbolise.
Discussing the veil in public schools and offices is all right, sure. I imagine one has to start somewhere.
However, a relative taped for me the talk show that recently saw the Nicolas Sarkozy / Tariq Ramadan “showdown”.
Watching Ramadan, pressed by Sarkozy on death by stoning in Islam, going away with it and without acknowledging the barbaric nature of the practice was already infuriating enough, but what really made me jump all over the place wasn’t Ramadan’s contribution to the debate. That guy is the Joseph Goebbels of Islam, what else could we expect from him than a (more than) implicit endorsement of the worse of Islam?
No, what really got me out in the streets screaming is the tragically weak answer from Sarkozy, (both as the French minister of Interior and as a decent, civilized man). It was a golden occasion to nail Ramadan on the wall, and beyond him, all his followers and apologists (and to think that this thug is depicted as a “thoughtful” and “moderate” Muslim scholar…)
Yet nothing happened, and the minister offered the Islamofascist a nice way out, in front of an attentive audience.
You and I are obviously on the side of the young Muslim women you describe (I, even more than you, if you allow me a lewd joke) but apparently, Mr. Sarkozy is not. Or not that much.
Now all I’m wondering about is: what can the “debate” and “drastic” law on headscarves be worth of, when a public debate with a major French Ministry and a “charismatic” Muslim scholar, coming on Islam and death by stoning cannot end up with a firm and unconditional condemnation of the said practice, on a national TV channel on prime-time?
As for your question, (do you really think it won’t go forward?), all I can say is that considering the utterly incoherent drive of French politics over the past 30 years (and particularly since 9/11 as far as this very question is concerned), I’m reaching the point where I seriously think that I don’t know what I’m supposed to think.
What’s more, you actually have a very good point when you say, “it seems that the legislators know that the electorate wants it on the books”. They surely know how bad it is now (I frankly believe it’s even worse than two years ago: when people you used to know as notorious Socialists start telling you they’re going to vote for Le Pen’s National Front, it’s time to pause, and ponder). Even if they didn’t really get the lesson of Le Pen’s last “success”, they can’t ignore that he’s bound for another chance, mostly because of their own inaction.
So I’m not saying they’re not going to enforce this law. I’m just saying: depends on who’s going to push them the most, and in which direction.
I’m afraid the outcome is not clear yet.
Susan – You said it all. The BBC already knows that the only religion it cannot mock in any way whatsoever is Islam. You can have funny Jews and funny Christians and funny Hindus and funny Buddhists, but Allah forbid you should cause anyone to laugh at a Muslim.
Question for serious discussion: why are the BBC and the British government playing by rules set by aliens rather than the British tradition of irreverence? Why is no one taking this seriously? My personal view, Blair and Co are well aware of what’s happening and have engineered it this way. They’re all unreconstructed communists from their college days and they want the destruction of the West. Why? Who knows?
Will it succeed? No. The West is too inventive and quick on its feet. The Muslims are still plodding through the year 1400 (or something – who cares?). But instead of having nipped it in the bud, they are emboldening these people and building up a major, major fight.
Dissident: I agree with you that French politics towards Islam sounds utterly chaotic, but remember it is only a bit worse than the West’s policy toward Islam in general. The right fears attacking a “religion” and the left fears exposing the contradictory nature of “multiculturalism”, the ony idea it has left to sell now that Communisim is dead. Much easier to close your eyes and just pretend that gays, feminists,New Age crystal-sellers and radical Islamists can all co-exist peacefully and happily in the multi-culti paradise of their ridiculous fantasies.
Re: Tariq Ramadan, he has just obtained a prestigious post at the most famous Catholic university in the United States, so you are shortly to be rid of him. France’s gain here is unfortunately the US’s loss. He now has a nicely spotlighted pulpit on the world’s most powerful stage to preach from.
Diss, I’ve read your post carefully and it was very juicy and full of interesting things. I’m going to read it again. But meantime, we did not watch the same TV shows. One in particular that I saw (it’s the one with that elderly, patrician-looking thin guy as compere who for some Gallic reason stands at a lectern throughout), I was honestly looking forward to them coming to blows. It was great! One very chic 35-ish Muslim woman who was one of the guests got so angry she picked up her Gucci and stormed out. The TV cameras followed her after she left the studio until she left the building and Diss, that babe was smokin’!
A big clump of white draperies with a face composed mainly of superior distaste opined something I didn’t get, the audience got furious, the indigenous Frenchmen were beside themselves with anger and a poor, Western-clad conciliatory Muslim man was trying to calm everyone down. The guy was actually very pleasant. But how is it the men get to dress in Western clothes in Paris and the women get to dress for leading a camel across the dunes? How is it in high summer, the men are in comfortable and trendy shorts and sporty T-shirts and the women are wearing carpets?) Anyway, this is the closest France has ever gotten to Jerry Springer.
If I think of any more, I will answer some other of your points tomorrow as I’ve been having a couple of non-Islamic drinks and may not give them the respect they deserve (your points, that is. I certainly respect my drinks).
BUT, Chirac did say in public that wearing the headscarf was an act of aggression agains the host society. I mean, Chirac actually said that. And Jacques Mynard (or similar, didn’t look it up) said you give them a finger and they eat your arm all the way up to the elbow. To me, it doesn’t seem as though they’re in the mood for compromise. They are major pissed off.
They have even let it be known that they are trying to find a legal way for Jewish boys to still wear the kippat in school.
Verity, the issue goes far beyond just not being able to satirize Islam on the BBC. Read the two articles I found in the Telegraph (they will come up easily if you search on “Islam” on the Telegraph’s site.)
It’s about systematically indoctrinating our children and Western society in general to reject Christianity and accept Islam — at all levels of our most important institutions.
Why is Christianity being tremendously pressured to endorse gay marriage while the fact that Islamic law not only does not accept gay unions, but actually mandates the death penalty for gays, is being ignored? Just one example of the double standard; there are many, many more.
If we are to be a secular society then secularism and secularist attitudes should be applied to all religions, not just one. But then “some animals are more equal than others” has always been the mantra of the Left, hasn’t it?
A couple of years ago I read that Prince Charles had converted to Islam, and that the real reason Elizabeth is hanging on, is that Charles cannot lawfully become King because he is no longer in good standing with the CofE. So she has to wait for Wills to grow up a bit a maybe gat married and figure out how to manuver Charles out of the way.
Whilst I think Prince Chaz is a buffoon, I do not believe for a minute he has converted to Islam… but the notion that the CoE was ever anything but a tool of convenience from the moment Henry IIX disestablished the RC Church is rather curious.
Robert Schwartz – That is so ridiculous! Where do these stories come from?
The reason the Queen is “hanging on” as you put it, is, she is the Queen until she dies. We do not have the tradition of abdication that some continentals do. She took her vow for life. She can’t retire from a vow.
Even if it were possible, I would shudder at the thought of William (who is not the Prince of Wales) acceding to the throne. He’s a little bit too Diana-esque for my tastes. And I don’t like his looks. He looks like a thug. Harry’s cute, though.
Susan, I hardly think terrorist for hire Carlos Ramirez is representative of the far left. He reminds me of the Marlon Brando line in “The Young Ones”:
Q: What are you rebelling against?
Marlon: What’ve you got?
Of course, we could see G Galloway cut and run for the safety of militant Islam in view of his current difficulties.
The SWP ought to be closely watched though.
Susan, I take all your points. But the question is: why? Why do all these people want to give their countries away to be ruled by a primitive, bigotted, vicious, uncivilised “religion”? Do people like Tony Blair and Jack Straw, for example – and Barbra Streisand and Susan Sarandon – think that if the Muslims managed to take over a Western country, they would somehow be “excused” because they had put such energy into assisting the cause of the destruction of the West?
The destruction of the West seems to be the end in itself for these people. I think even Sean Gabb doesn’t have a theory about what the next step would be.
Meanwhile, Holland’s turfing them out by the thousand, Denmark’s said, in effect, no more imans, France is banning the headscarf on school property because wearing it is now officially regarded as an act of aggression against the host society, and Germany is also banning public employees from wearing their stupid headscarves. It’s a start.
Foul, foetid Trots T Blair, J Straw, D Blunkett & Co will soon be isolated as continental Europe takes back its territory without reference to any EU rules.
Verity, Susan,
I don’t know if the 14,000 loopy converts are a herald of a great and deep Islaamicisation of the English. I can hardly believe it, though. But equally I can hardly credit that the marxian left is so craven as to tolerate such a profoundly conservative and unprogressive faith that despises virtually everything they stand for. Yet, self-evidently they do. Any cultural weapon is acceptable to the left it can be wielded against the white, heterosexual majority. The end, as always, justifies the means.
As time goes, therefore, by one might expect to see a few straws in the wind. I predict:-
1. Charles’ preference for reigning as Defender of the Faiths is re-floated by Mandelson himself.
2. The Guardian complains about the “many virtues” of the Parekh Report lost in the “uncalled for knee-jerk reaction that followed its publication” and demands its incorporation into the forthcoming Labour Manifesto.
3. The BBC launches its first major new detective series starring a strict Muslim heart-throb with a blond, blue-eyed bit on the side who is converting for love.
4. David Blunkett makes a major new policy announcement on race equality in a speech to the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain.
5. Tony Blair raises the MPGB’s Prsident, Kalim Siddiqui, to the Peerage.
6. The Jewish Chronicle reports a snub to the government when the Chief Rabbi spurns an invitation to a multi-faith conference hosted by the Rev Blair himself, only to share a platform with David Davis amid much warmth and agreement.
7. Gordon Brown will have his children Christened.
PS – Has anyone seen this list of “prominent” people – like the deeply creeply John Birt’s kid, for example, who’ve converted? Is he the most famous one they could come up with? And Emma something whose great grandfather was Asquith?
Anyone else we’ve never heard of?
Is Jeremy Clarkson on the list, for example? Graham Norton? Jeremy Paxman? Victoria Wood? That lord who owns all of Belgravia? Martin Amis? Roger Scruton? Will Carling? Boris Johnson? Who? I don’t want the whole 14,000. Just ten famous ones would do. Thank you.
Look on the bright side. For every radical out of the convert population, you might get a dozen or even a score of moderates, which is just what Islam needs to tilt itself to modernity.
Or maybe I’m underestimating the power of fundamentalism…
The Wobbly Guy
Verity, I agree that the article’s exaggerated. You could easily do the same article about prominent people in the UK converting to Catholicism — after all, haven’t Princess Di’s mom; the Duchess of Kent and a couple of her kids all become Cathos? One wonders why the Times chose to highlight this particular “trend”? Unless it is part and parcel of the whole scheme to promote Islam in the UK?
But here’s a list of people I know who have converted — up to you to judge whether they are “prominent” or not:
Cat Stevens
Joe “Ahmed” Dobson — son of Frank Dobson (former labour minister I believe)
Yvonne Ridley — journalist who was captured by the Tliban
Jemima Khan
The son and daughter of a Lord Scott, who led an inquiry into the first Gulf War. Don’t recall their names
The aforementioned Charles Le Gai Eaton
Various academics whose names I’ve forgotten
And a couple of people so close to being Muslims as you can get without actually calling themselves Muslim:
Karen Armstrong
W. Montgomery Watt (the “Grand old man” of Islamic studies in the UK — he’s something like 98 years old.)
Susan – Well, yes, but converting to Catholicism isn’t changing one’s religion. Most who convert to Catholicism are Anglicans (Episcopalians) who, admittedly, are seeking a greater moral certainty than the church led by the Arch-Hippy as David so memorably styled him. But they’re still Christians.
The ragtag you mention – never heard of a single one of them. Obviously the one who was captured by the TaliTubbies was suffering from the Stockholm syndrome, so she doesn’t count. Jemima Khan married Imran Khan, a cricket hero and international, sought-over dish. People do foolish things when their hormones are all over the map, so I’m not counting her as a convert of faith.
Otherwise, the only *known* person on the list of people who could be said to have actually converted is Cat Stevens, and he converted at least 20 years ago. He is Jewish, BTW, as is Jemima Khan. The rest seem to be a ragtag and bobtail bunch of nobodies. I thought we were talking about people we’d actually heard of, even if they weren’t large time celebs. But the son and daughter of someone who once conducted an enquiry? The son of an ex-cabinet minister and failed candidate for mayor of London? This is the A list?
I know I`m a bit late on this discussion – but here’s an article written by a convert addressing other converts
http://ireland.iol.ie/~afifi/Articles/british.htm