Today’s guest blog contribution is from Humza Yousaf, SNP Holyrood candidate for Glasgow. You can also find Humza on Twitter or Facebook.
55 years ago this week America’s civil rights movement was catalysed by one granny who refused to be shoved aff the bus or even relegated to the back. The result of Rosa Park’s historic stance was not only the dismantling of many barriers between communities but began the formation of the melting pot, which in turn we have developed into modern-day multiculturalism.
Multiculturalism was once a concept we looked up to but it has now become one of the dirtiest words on the European continent. Just last month Chancellor Merkel pronounced it had ‘utterly failed’ when addressing her Christian Democratic Union colleagues. Funnily enough, she decided to keep quiet on that one while the country’s football team, made up of a part-Ghanaian defender, Polish striker and a midfield maestro of Turkish origin, went on to reach the semi-finals and come 3rd in this year’s World Cup.
Germany is not alone – observers of European affairs will note, with increasing anxiety, that an extreme right-wing, xenophobic tidal wave is sweeping across Western Europe, with Muslim populations particularly under the spotlight.
Belgium has become the first European country to implement a nationwide ban on the face veil worn by ‘at most’ 215 Muslim women in Belgium, according to the Belgian Institute of Equal Opportunities. It is difficult to comprehend why there is a furore spreading across Europe concerning this mundane black piece of cloth. It is, no doubt, a symptom of a much deeper malaise concerning the role of immigrants, their apparent refusal to integrate and the loss of ‘traditional values’.
With deep and severe cuts forthcoming, the debate regarding immigrants and the role they play in society will continue to rage on and worryingly may increase strain in already volatile communities. It is the very nature of the debate, which is centred on the identity and loyalty question, and how this is presented, which is fanning the flames of racial intolerance.
It was 20 years ago that Norman Tebbit declared the cricket test as an apt means of gauging a community’s loyalty to the state, many of us think that times have moved on – but in some cases Tebbit’s sentiments are more prevalent than ever.
We are a people obsessed with defining each other’s identities. Are you Muslim or are you Scottish? British or Pakistani? Such unhelpful categorisations ignore the reality of a multi-ethnic Scotland and UK, where identities are a lot more fluid and unrestricted. This is perhaps demonstrated if I take my own example. As an Asian Scot born in Glasgow to a father from Pakistan and a mother from Kenya, I went on to marry my wife, Gail, who is a White Scot born in England to an English father and Scottish mother. I would challenge anyone to accurately define the identity of any children we may have in the future. Will they be ¼ Scottish, ¼ Pakistani, ¼ English etc? Are we really happy to simply reduce people to fractions?
In the UK the debate about race equality and multiculturalism often finds itself manifest in the heartlands of middle England and, more often than not, is won and lost in London. However, little attention is given to Scotland’s multicultural landscape which has its own unique challenges and, more importantly, offers some of its own very fresh solutions.
While not being complacent about racism and intolerance in Scotland, we have to question why, time and time again, the BNP and Scottish Defence League have been rejected by Scots. I firmly believe that our notion of civic nationalism, as opposed to ethnic nationalism, creates an atmosphere of inclusiveness which makes us less hostile to one and other.
Whether it is the British National Party or France’s National Front, the concept of nationalism is being dragged through the mud until it resembles almost nothing of its true form. This is not helped by political posturing by some within the Holyrood bubble, where the word ‘Nationalist’ has been used (often derogatorily) Â to describe only one political persuasion.
The late Bashir Ahmad, Scotland’s first Asian MSP and a man respected across the Scottish Parliament chamber, explained the concept of civic nationalism in the simplest and most concise manner:
‘It is not important where we have come from; it’s where we are going together, as a nation.’
Although most comfortably propagated by the SNP, they do not claim to have possession over civic nationalism. It is a concept which is interwoven in the fabric of our nation, we will all be familiar with the age-old saying that in Scotland ‘we’re a’ Jock Tamson’s bairns’.
This forward-thinking and progressive notion does not attempt to define people’s identity but rather, allows them to define themselves, if they feel it necessary. The result? Black and ethnic minorities living in Scotland are just as likely, in some cases more likely, to define themselves as Scottish than their white counterparts (see Hussain and Miller).
As a nation we have accepted that people can be Indian-Scots, Polish-Scots, Scots-Irish and not have to choose one over the other. Even our cuisine reflects this with cheese, chips and curry sauce mixing in perfect harmony to create a culinary delight to be found in any West of Scotland takeaway!
Civic nationalism is something we can all be proud of as Scots. We have moved away from obsessing over each other’s identities and instead focussed on how different communities can and do contribute to our society – we have, in essence, shifted the nature of the entire debate.
Perhaps Chancellor Merkel would care to turn her head towards Scotland’s direction and in doing so she may well hear the vibrant sound of bhangra and bagpipes – confirmation that, despite its challenges, multiculturalism is thriving and continuing to evolve.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Scottish Civic Nationalism: The Bhangra & Bagpipes Solution « Better Nation -- Topsy.com
#1 by Douglas McLellan on December 5, 2010 - 5:03 pm
Your post is quite interesting in that it does highlight some interesting Scottish quirks but I also think that you have missed some things.
Scotland has a BAME population of less than 3% compared to almost 10% for England. In some within England communities that percentage is very different with state primary schools with a majority of pupils be Muslim. There is not a school in Scotland where that is the case. The EDL and the BNP have no real support in Scotland because the BAME population is so low. And we have the whole Catholic/Protestant thing on the West Coast which also has an impact. These two reasons, I think, are more relevant than the idea of civic nationalism. We are all, despite why you say, still focussed on identities in Scotland.
The reason Nationalist has been tied to one political persuasion is the sheer effort one political party (and even one political leader) has put in claiming the term and trying to embody Scottishness. From his Tartan Army Tam o’Shanter to his constant attacks on London, Alex Salmond has done nothing to forward the idea of Civic Nationalism compared to his drive for Scottish Nationalism (which is often seen as not enough by SNP members).
The rise of intolerance in Europe is multi-faceted but I would be interested to know if the rise of things burka and veil wearing has happened as a consequence of intolerance or intolerance has risen as a consequence of increased veil wearing. I remember watching a programme by Zeinab Badawi (I think – could have been Samira Ahmed) who was trying to find out why UK Muslim teenage girls where doing the opposite of what she did when she rebelled against the veil. She found that the reasons were to do with a religious and tradition perspective that was not prevalent in the Muslim community when she was you. There was not multiculturalism there.
And multiculturalism does create victims. Forced marriages and honour killings are still happening in the UK because the idea that all aspects of multiculturalism are hard to challenge is still prevalent
#2 by Indy on December 5, 2010 - 6:41 pm
It is a mistake to think that the black and ethnic minority population is distributed in Scotland at exactly 3 per cent for every community. As in England there are areas where there is a higher proportion of people from an ethnic minority and areas where there are very few people from an ethnic minority background at all. There are in fact a number of schools in Glasgow where the majority of the pupils are Muslim. Off the top of my head I would suggest St Albert’s Primary in Pollokshields where over 80 per cent of pupils are Muslim (that’s why they go to a Catholic school of course).
Also, you may not be aware that the forced marriage legislation which is being passed in Scotland makes it a criminal offence, unlike the rest of the UK where it is a civil offence I believe.
The legislation here was pioneered by the late Bashir Ahmad, who clearly did not find it hard to challenge, as he was very certain that supporters of forced marriage were bad Muslims as well as bad people.
#3 by Observer on December 5, 2010 - 9:31 pm
What frustrates me when discussions arise over multi-culturalism is the fact that many people do not acknowledge that the position in Scotland is significantly different to the position in England.
I don’t think that is due to a we’re a Jock Tamson’s bairns attitude, it’s just something that has happened.
But it has happened & it’s something that we should be looking at because the experience in Scotland has been good, whereas in parts of England it hasn’t been.
I don’t think that has actually been analyzed to any great extent but it should be. We have got something right here & yet we don’t appear to be doing much about that.
#4 by Laura on December 5, 2010 - 10:38 pm
Interesting, positive article Humza and I wish you well for next May. But if we, as a nation, don’t obsess over dual identities then why not be happy with Scots-British too?
Plus I really can’t dismiss women wearing a veil over their face in public as just a ‘mundane piece of black cloth’. I’m also very uncomfortable with what this represents, and it doesn’t reflect any kind of negativity towards immigrants or yearning for traditional values. But that takes the debate off in a whole new direction.
#5 by Zoroaster on December 6, 2010 - 6:21 am
It’s been analyzed and run into the ground by academic sociologists (Baumann, ‘The Multicultural Riddle’, ‘Contesting Culture: Discourses of Identity in Multi-Ethnic London’; and Werbner, ‘Imagined Diasporas among Manchester Muslims’ stand out as obvious examples of studies treating this topic through looking at the actual results of what’s gone on). It’s a shame this post (like nearly all of mainstream multicultural discourse) doesn’t pick up on any of their work, and indeed falls into the very traps which they identify in the multicultural movement.
This post is simplistic — as a necessity — and while we can’t extrapolate trends in England to Scotland, the terminology and the examples used demonstrate a deep-seated essentialist discourse going on in the background behind this post, and I don’t see this as being an innovation in changing the doomed idea of multiculturalism as the confederation of essential identities.
#6 by Indy on December 6, 2010 - 10:54 am
The problem about discussing what is different between Scotland and England is that it opens the door to accusations of anti-Emglishness.
The fact is that people who live in Scotland – whether indigenous Scots, Asian Scots or any other kind of Scot – define themselves as being not English.
This is the inevitable outcome of living in a unitary state – the UK – which is dominated by one country, England. If you are Scots, Welsh or Irish you cannot help but define yourself in the UK context as not-English. That’s why the “cricket test” approach does not work here. We are all, in the context of the UK, part of a minority. We are the other. We are different. We are not English.
That is why the whole issue of multi-culturalism/race/identity is different here. We all start from the position that we are not part of the UK mainstream. This may be the only Union dividend that works to our advantage!
#7 by Daniel on December 6, 2010 - 12:54 pm
Very much enjoyed the post. I have to say that coming from a town in the Scottish Borders that’s pretty much 99% white and mildly racist I’m not too sure.
#8 by James on December 6, 2010 - 1:41 pm
That does sound unfortunate for the 1%.
#9 by Humza on December 7, 2010 - 11:57 am
Hi folks, apologies for the delayed response my net went down and I am just back online now thanks for the contributions to the articles will try and address some of the points.
Douglas – You are correct in many of the points you make. However, like Indy pointed out we have areas in Scotland where there is a significant BME population much higher than in parts of England (particularly the South East). Where I think one of the biggest differences lie, and perhaps I should have made this clear, is that less ghetto-isation seems to exist in Scotland where large numbers of minorities reside.
Your point about sectarianism is valid but again as you mention yourself largely (though obviously not exclusively) relevant to the West coast. Quite clearly sectarianism and racism share many of the same characteristics, shifting the focus away from identities and towards realising that both Catholics and Protestants have a rich history in our country and both contribute much to our society would perhaps go a fair way in helping to defeat it.
I’ve tried to remain as a-partisan throughout the post as possible as I truly do think that the preference for civic nationalism is inherent within many of us – regardless of political persuasion. To suggest that Alex Salmond has done nothing to forward the idea of civic nationalism compared to Scottish Nationalism is inaccurate, certainly from the speeches I’ve heard him make and the efforts I’ve seen him pursue. His drive for Scottish Nationalism is inherently intertwined with the idea of Civic Scottish Nationalism – for him the two cannot be separated.
The idea that multiculturalism encourages detestable acts like honour killing is a false one. The problem is the atmosphere within which we have the debate. If communities feel under constant attack and threat they are more likely to become protectionist – in a cultural context. They will guard as many practices as possible in fear of completely losing their culture. If we have a positive atmosphere where people’s identity (dual or otherwise) is accepted then we can have an honest debate about which practices may contribute towards a fairer society and those that do not. Admittedly, it is a tricky point to get to but in my opinion much of Europe is going in the wrong direction whereas in Scotland we, more often than not, seem to be on the right side of the debate.
#10 by Humza on December 7, 2010 - 12:16 pm
Observer – couldn’t agree more. I have been in discussions with race-equality think tank and doing some work with them to highlight Scotland’s example. Sometimes I think we don’t realise what a good job we do in this regard. Perhaps the achievements of this are over-shadowed by a perceived failure in regards to the Sectarianism issue?
Laura – Thank you for your kind words. In respect to the dual nationality question – I don’t think any of us should have a problem if people choose to define themselves as Scots-British or indeed just British. I can readily admit that some ‘Scottish Nationalists’ do seem to have a problem with this but I think it is definitely a dwindling minority. For me the push for an independent Scotland has nothing to do with how I choose to define myself but is a yearning to have the tools (be these economic, social or other) to make Scotland a more prosperous nation – in every regard.
As for your points regarding the veil, I completely understand where you are coming from. Many people believe that the vast majority of Muslim women who wear it are being forced to do so or indeed are being oppressed by it. From the experiences I have had with those who wear the face veil this is most definitely not the case. The irony is that in many so-called ‘Islamic countries’ the proportion of women forced to wear the veil is a lot higher than those in Western countries (as in some cases it is state imposed). My point is that the amount of attention given to it in comparison to the number who wear it is clearly disproportionate and we have to question why.
#11 by Humza on December 7, 2010 - 12:38 pm
Zoroaster – Your post highlights the very problem I refer to throughout my piece and which you also accept. All those studies you have mentioned are focussed on the English situation – which clearly differs, on a number of levels, with our experiences in Scotland. The study which sheds a fair bit of light on our situation is the one quoted in the post (Hussain and Miller) – I recommend having a read of it if you have not done so already. I think the main point I am trying, but perhaps failing, to make is that yes multiculturalism can fall into the trap of becoming a confederation of essential identities, however, identities are a lot more fluid, flexible and communities a lot more heterogeneous than we recognise. If this heterogeneity was more readily accepted and recognised then perhaps we could avoid the generalisations which create a hostile atmosphere between communities.
Daniel – Glad you enjoyed the post, my thanks to the Better Nation guys for allowing me to post on their site. Like I say racism will unfortunately always exist, regardless of the demographics making up a particular city/town/village. However, our challenge is to change the nature of the debate and feed on the positives the many communities of Scotland have made to our country – even the Scottish Borders is not immune to this (as a tiny miniscule example I have a friend who owns a couple of convenience stores in the borders – Selkirk I think– and employs about 6 local staff!).