Watching BBC Breakfast today I came across something that really made me think about the way in which modern society operates. Discussing parenting a couple and their young child were in the studio, the mother raving about how good the child aged about 5 was at his language skills etc. A proud parent you would think and rightly so.
However what later emerged was the discussion of parenting and that the mother had a full-time job as did the father and this case study was justification for working mothers to continue working and have a career. The fact that the child in his all too pristine school uniform was maybe ahead of his peers in terms of numeracy and literacy, proved that working mothers are able to raise well balanced children just like any mother staying at home. The discussion then moved onto comparing the 21st century situation of working mothers and fathers to that in the 1950's where mothers would "stay" at home and look after the "home". The point being made that in the 50's most mothers were most likely too busy with housework to spend quality time with their children etc and that it was no better a situation than what we have today.
The young family in question was quite obviously middle class , most likely sending their son to a top of the range school and having all the means to provide the best education for the child in order for him to leap frog his peers in terms of educational standard. However is this how society should judge it's future by the understanding language and numbers?
Having children is a conscious decision people (well most people) make, and this means like any other decision in life it has to dealt with seriousness and care. Although in a career focused world like the one in which most children in the UK are born, the child has to immediately compete for attention with the careers of it's parents. Being the father of a 2 year old myself I know for a FACT that my daughter would prefer that I stayed at home with her than go to work, not because I can teach her A's from her B's but because children crave love and attention. I am not in any way saying that anyone should shun the obligations of providing materially for their children. However when the prevalent culture is to shun the love and attention the child craves for the sake of fulfilling personal dreams of "success" and "career" then there is something wrong with societies perception of priorities in life.
Herein lies the fundamental problem with society from the cradle to the grave it's one big rat race, a race most don't comprehend and no one wins. The competitive nature of human beings sometimes manifests itself in the worst ways where children are concerned. The constant need to compare your child with someone else's even to the point of how much food they eat and at what age they were fully potty trained is so common I find it disturbing.
Everyone must have heard of the middle class mums in suburban London who will do anything to get their children into the nursery / kinder garden / school of choice, who will go to pick up their kids in a SUV because it's the "in" thing. Not any old SUV but the most desirable one , you know the Land Rover or X5 eco-hating-gas-guzzling-make-you-look-rich kind. These mainly young women married to rich footballers or something of that ilk stand at the school gates with their £5000 Prada handbags "competing" with the other Mums, and what is the subject of the competition? that's it their Kids. The little people who just want to go home and watch the Simpsons, which is quite ironically a metaphor for dysfunctional families in America.
Before the little darlings know what has hit them they are in primary school then off to piano lessons and by the age of 12 they must have an appreciation of Shupan only Shupan could have had. If you are not Prada wearing then swap Shupan for Football, Karate whatever and you have the same situation a kid made the centre of some freak show devised by adults to hide their own lack of self worth.
The point is why is there a fascination with competing kids? It is all too correct that children must be brought up in the best manner; with the best characteristics and given the best start in life. But when we equate all this to material and academic success is it little wonder either children turn into grown adults detached from life and lost in a race to fulfill some half-baked pipe dream of a career, or conversely, at some stage lost a "who had the best handwriting" competition at school and then were forever shunned and ended up in some "hoodie" wearing gang who think its fun to mug old ladies for a laugh.
Wouldn't it be better if rather than building competitiveness in Children we built basic ideas such as respect, honour , dignity and humility? Surely this would make them better contributors to society when they grow up. They might not be the best A, B,C'ers in the class but if they knew that the aim of their life was not to achieve for themselves but to better the societies in which they live maybe there could be a ray of hope for future generations.
As Muslims the situation is no different it seems sometimes Muslims are worse at these competitions that anyone else. However the competitiveness should only be in good deeds.
Tuesday, 17 July 2007
Friday, 13 July 2007
Muslims DIS-United?
Since the failed terrorist attacks earlier this month the Muslim community has once again come under the most intense scrutiny.
There is no surprise that any reputable Muslim organisation or individual has sought to condemn these actions, which have ranged from such diverse groups as MPAC, the MCB, the BMF and Hizb ut-Tahrir. There has even been public shows of condemnations in the forms of anti-terror rallies and mini conferences to deal with the issues facing the Islamic community in Britain today.
In spite of these condemnations, the role of Muslims in Britain and in particular their supposed role in these acts of terrorism continue to be a prominent point of discussion in the media and other circles. The media has been awash of Muslims groups coming under attack from an array of ex-jihadists, who are very much flavour of the month. Even mainstream organisations such as the MCB have been openly attacked on their role, first from the likes of Hasan Butt and then from the likes of MPAC.
In light of such intense debate, Muslims are being actively encouraged to turn on one another. Take the following quote for example:
"If anyone has any idea that they will find some sanctuary or a place to hide after such activities then he has it absolutely wrong, they will be hunted out."
Notwithstanding the admirable sentiments of that quote, that it was said by Dr Mohammed Akbah Ali, chairman of the Liverpool Mosque and Islamic Institute is equally troubling. It was spoken at a press conference held in the next street to where a house was raided in connection to the subsequent arrests that were made.
The fact that this had been said whislt those in question have yet to be charged speaks volumes about the inability of community leaders to address the issues at hand. He could have waited until legal proceedings had reached the appropriate stage which merited such a quote. If he felt that they could not as a community wait, then he could have tempered his statement by not only reminding the world at large of Islam's position on such events but also the wider society's responsibilties (and so-called British values) including the rights to a fair trial and the presumption that an individual is innocent until proven guilty.
Furthermore, the rhetoric he uses, so similar of that in the aftermath of 7/7 about how extremism has no place in community or the wider society at large, is now almost past its sell by date. What he fails to mention is how this will be achieved? We are no more closer to that answer than we were two years ago. What is more worrying is that these so-called leaders continue to play the ostrich and bury their heads in the sand hoping the problem will just go away. There seems to be no idea of how to conceptually mould the Muslim generation that follows us. There seems no idea how we instill them values of how to steadfastly hold onto their beliefs whislt at the same time adhere to the legal framework of the society they live in. There seems no idea of how to meet the arguments and obstaces these Muslims face in their reasoning or grappling of faith and how it can comfortably sit within the life they lead. If mosques and those elders that purport to be custodians cannot actually come out with viable soultions then they will only have served to damage those they seek to protect!
Then that are such initiaves as Muslims United that seems to fall into the same old trap of paying lip service to such incidents. We have been here before. We have seen such statements prior to 7/7 and after.
Muslims United lists several well known organisations joining the bandwagon. Nonetheless, their grandiose claims that they represent everyday Muslims - the Muslim common man - doesn't really hold up to the litmus test. This half-hearted gesture does nothing but show the community for what it is, disunited and unable to respond to the issues at hand. If the organisers wanted to show a united front in trying to aboslve the community from blame then they should have got more just a plethora of organisations that most mainstream Muslims will have trouble recognising or identifying with.
AND THEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM!
For no matter who the oragnisation is or the amount of organisations there are, the Muslim community that matters still feels that they are unable to identify with them. A recent poll conducted by Populus found only 7% of British muslims felt that the Muslim Council of Britain - perhaps the most well know of the main stream groups - represented their views. The second biggest response with 25% was "Don't know" and the first - with a gigantic 52% - was "None".
Yet, this has always been the case, Muslim have continaully suggested that they fail to identify with these groups, with a number of polls suggesting so. (You can see a snippet of British Muslim's opinions here or here). Even within the aftermath of 7/7, polls were suggesting that "the Muslim community in Britain lacks a single, unifying voice at both an institutional and an individual level." It is only a matter of a year ago when the same questions were levelled in a Channel Four documentary.
The Government itself has muddied the waters by actively courting a number of such groups in a bid to liase with the Muslim community at large. Their links with the MCB have been often well known to many:
"The MCB was officially founded in November 1997, shortly after Tony Blair came to power, and has had a close relationship with the Labour government ever since ... It remains particularly influential within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which has a little-known outreach department which works with Britain's Muslims. The FCO pamphlet Muslims in Britain is essentially an MCB publication and the official ministerial celebration of the Muslim festival of Eid is organised jointly with the MCB."
The ineffectivemenss of the MCB has lead the British government to entertain other groups in a bid to have a genuine influence over the Muslim majoirty, even going as far as pushing the Sufi Muslim Council and Haras Rafiq into the mainstream.
Is it hardly surprising then with such a number of groups and with such influence as the the unofficial backing of the British Government and the inability to present a consensus view is leaving the majority of Muslims confused and floundering! Unfortuantely, we are own worst enemies, for we actively indulge in the divide and conquer tactics that seek to segregate people from each other and which only ever serve the interests of the State and never the best interests of the people!
There is no surprise that any reputable Muslim organisation or individual has sought to condemn these actions, which have ranged from such diverse groups as MPAC, the MCB, the BMF and Hizb ut-Tahrir. There has even been public shows of condemnations in the forms of anti-terror rallies and mini conferences to deal with the issues facing the Islamic community in Britain today.
In spite of these condemnations, the role of Muslims in Britain and in particular their supposed role in these acts of terrorism continue to be a prominent point of discussion in the media and other circles. The media has been awash of Muslims groups coming under attack from an array of ex-jihadists, who are very much flavour of the month. Even mainstream organisations such as the MCB have been openly attacked on their role, first from the likes of Hasan Butt and then from the likes of MPAC.
In light of such intense debate, Muslims are being actively encouraged to turn on one another. Take the following quote for example:
"If anyone has any idea that they will find some sanctuary or a place to hide after such activities then he has it absolutely wrong, they will be hunted out."
Notwithstanding the admirable sentiments of that quote, that it was said by Dr Mohammed Akbah Ali, chairman of the Liverpool Mosque and Islamic Institute is equally troubling. It was spoken at a press conference held in the next street to where a house was raided in connection to the subsequent arrests that were made.
The fact that this had been said whislt those in question have yet to be charged speaks volumes about the inability of community leaders to address the issues at hand. He could have waited until legal proceedings had reached the appropriate stage which merited such a quote. If he felt that they could not as a community wait, then he could have tempered his statement by not only reminding the world at large of Islam's position on such events but also the wider society's responsibilties (and so-called British values) including the rights to a fair trial and the presumption that an individual is innocent until proven guilty.
Furthermore, the rhetoric he uses, so similar of that in the aftermath of 7/7 about how extremism has no place in community or the wider society at large, is now almost past its sell by date. What he fails to mention is how this will be achieved? We are no more closer to that answer than we were two years ago. What is more worrying is that these so-called leaders continue to play the ostrich and bury their heads in the sand hoping the problem will just go away. There seems to be no idea of how to conceptually mould the Muslim generation that follows us. There seems no idea how we instill them values of how to steadfastly hold onto their beliefs whislt at the same time adhere to the legal framework of the society they live in. There seems no idea of how to meet the arguments and obstaces these Muslims face in their reasoning or grappling of faith and how it can comfortably sit within the life they lead. If mosques and those elders that purport to be custodians cannot actually come out with viable soultions then they will only have served to damage those they seek to protect!
Then that are such initiaves as Muslims United that seems to fall into the same old trap of paying lip service to such incidents. We have been here before. We have seen such statements prior to 7/7 and after.
Muslims United lists several well known organisations joining the bandwagon. Nonetheless, their grandiose claims that they represent everyday Muslims - the Muslim common man - doesn't really hold up to the litmus test. This half-hearted gesture does nothing but show the community for what it is, disunited and unable to respond to the issues at hand. If the organisers wanted to show a united front in trying to aboslve the community from blame then they should have got more just a plethora of organisations that most mainstream Muslims will have trouble recognising or identifying with.
AND THEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM!
For no matter who the oragnisation is or the amount of organisations there are, the Muslim community that matters still feels that they are unable to identify with them. A recent poll conducted by Populus found only 7% of British muslims felt that the Muslim Council of Britain - perhaps the most well know of the main stream groups - represented their views. The second biggest response with 25% was "Don't know" and the first - with a gigantic 52% - was "None".
Yet, this has always been the case, Muslim have continaully suggested that they fail to identify with these groups, with a number of polls suggesting so. (You can see a snippet of British Muslim's opinions here or here). Even within the aftermath of 7/7, polls were suggesting that "the Muslim community in Britain lacks a single, unifying voice at both an institutional and an individual level." It is only a matter of a year ago when the same questions were levelled in a Channel Four documentary.
The Government itself has muddied the waters by actively courting a number of such groups in a bid to liase with the Muslim community at large. Their links with the MCB have been often well known to many:
"The MCB was officially founded in November 1997, shortly after Tony Blair came to power, and has had a close relationship with the Labour government ever since ... It remains particularly influential within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which has a little-known outreach department which works with Britain's Muslims. The FCO pamphlet Muslims in Britain is essentially an MCB publication and the official ministerial celebration of the Muslim festival of Eid is organised jointly with the MCB."
The ineffectivemenss of the MCB has lead the British government to entertain other groups in a bid to have a genuine influence over the Muslim majoirty, even going as far as pushing the Sufi Muslim Council and Haras Rafiq into the mainstream.
Is it hardly surprising then with such a number of groups and with such influence as the the unofficial backing of the British Government and the inability to present a consensus view is leaving the majority of Muslims confused and floundering! Unfortuantely, we are own worst enemies, for we actively indulge in the divide and conquer tactics that seek to segregate people from each other and which only ever serve the interests of the State and never the best interests of the people!
Tuesday, 10 July 2007
What did Live Earth Actually Achieve?
For those that missed it, Live Earth, was broadcast this past weekend and for those that have been completely under the radar of late, let me just quickly surmise for those not in the know, that Live Earth was a series of worldwide concerts organised by Save Our Selves and somehow fronted by Al Gore, intended to raise awareness about climate change and encourage people to live more environmentally friendly lifestyles.
It seems that once again the common man is at fault and needs to get its act together if they are to save Mother Nature. Those that were organising such a crusade and those performing in it must be exempt? Call me cynical but isn't organising a series of concerts on such a grand scale going to have an adverse effect? Isn't it a rather large price to pay just to raise the awareness of such an issue?
I am not the only one to see through this hypocrisy!
As the one unimpressed website put it:
"And what exactly did we learn between sets? That we should switch to energy-efficient lightbulbs? That we should check tire pressure to save gasoline? That we should unplug chargers when they're not charging?"
John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com exclaimed that the carbon footprint including the artists' and spectators' travel and energy consumption was probably at least 31,500 tonnes and that "we would have to plant 100,000 trees to offset the effect of Live Earth."
GreenPeace also criticised the event calling it it just a PR excercise and were in particular incensed with the decision to allow DaimlerChrysler to sponsor the event, claiming that "average level of carbon dioxide emissions from DaimlerChrysler's fleet was 186 grams per kilometre — well above the automobile industry's own commitment to cut emissions to 140 grams a kilometre."
The artists themselves were not above criticism, after all they were the ones on stage patronising millions of viewers on how they should be greener, a classic case of "do as i say, not do as i do". Most artistes came in by private jet, and their private lives are awash with examples of how they contribute to the destruction of the environment by owning a fleet of cars and a haven of high range houses!
Furthermore, has the sad state of politics got so desperate that any cause or issue that needs to be highlighted only needs to put on a series of concerts to raise awareness? Live Aid and the Free Nelson Madela Concerts in the 1980s were the blueprint. However, in this day of cynicism do these concerts really achieve their goal. Everyone knew that the world had failed Africa in the light of Live Aid, that the situation was just as worse 20 years on when Live 8 reared its ugly head. Likewise, everyone knows the planet is being ripped apart, but what will be done afterwards when people go back to their humdrum lives?
Well, now we know! They voted with their trash, the concerts are estimated to have generated more than 1000 tons of garbage from those attending! Oh and no one watched it either according to early reports!
For more hypocritical Live Earth bashing click here, and here, and here, and here and HERE
Sunday, 8 July 2007
Who called the thought Police?
"Winston wondered how far this falsification would go. Given the inexorable nature of the Party’s project, sooner or later, they would declare that two and two are five and if he, Winston questioned it he would probably be a lunatic and 'in a minority of one.".
These are the words of Winston Smith the fictional character in George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four , in the book Winston is a clerk in the Ministry of Truth, his job to rewrite historical documents to fit the current party line. Winston writing the above in his diary ponders on how far the party, which in essence represents "the state" would go to rewrite the truth to fit it's own purpose, to you and me this means propaganda, to shape the views of people in a deliberate manner for a pre-conceived end.
Propaganda was something Gordon Brown in his first public outing as the new Prime Minister talked about on the BBC's Sunday AM show (Sunday 1/7/2007). Interviewed by an almost apologetic Andrew Marr when asked if he (Brown) thought there was a direct link between Iraq and London he commented
" The terrorist threat we're dealing with is about a long term and sustained attack on the values that we represent...... And that's why the cultural effort, almost similar to what happened during the Cold War in the nineteen forties, fifties and sixties when we had to mount a propaganda effort, if you like, to explain to people that our values represented the best of commitments to individual dignity, to liberty and to human life being taken seriously. And I think that's what we are going to have to talk about in the next few years"
This statement sums up the message Brown and sectors of the government have been giving since the failed attacks in London and Glasgow, the script reads "It's about them hating our way of life, they think our women are slags, they want to kill anyone that doesn't believe in their way of life", and this line has been spun out in a manner that would make the spin doctors of the early Blair years green with envy.
The discussion of values and ideas hasn't been limited to government circles with Channel 4 News, BBC Newsnight amongst those discussing these points too. A picture is now being painted about a cultural war between the West and the ideas of an evil ideology, an ideology which will rest at nothing to destroy the very fabric of modern western society, that calls for Shariah and the Caliphate in the Muslim world, and a people motivated by nothing but a hatred for the "freedoms" of the West.
A few days after the attacks BBC's Newsnight pitted Shiv Malik against Inayat Bunglawala of the MCB. One would think in this current climate the discussion would centre around the events in London and Glasgow and possible causes. However Shiv Malik's agenda was something different and the questioning centred around Suicide bombings; killings of British Soldiers in Iraq and the MCB's support of Hamas; none of which are relevant to the discussion about motivation for the attacks. This tone has been carried throughout the last week, condemnation is not enough the only thing will do as Brown made so clear is acceptance of Western values and acknowledgment of the fantasy that there is something intrinsically wrong with Islam which is in need of reform.
In the same week as the incidents in London and Glasgow , 2 US Marines where charged with the murder of the 3 Iraqi civilians in Iskandariyah, Iraq. This brings the total number charged with murder to 20 . In Afghanistan the number of civilians killed by air raids was over 100 from just two incidents. The link between the incidents in Iraq and the UK is obvious and clear.
However as Winston understood the propaganda machine is not concerned with the truth but a twisted version of it, that fulfils it's long term goals. Winston would be the first to understand that the British government is no longer trying to get a point of view across but twisting falsehood into truth, and furthermore showing the truth as something only a lunatic fringe could ascribe to.
Winston concludes his diary entry with a definition of freedom - "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows".
This is being able to articulate the truth without fear, this is not a feeling Muslims are used to in the current climate. As for what Brown calls individual dignity from the eyes of a Muslim it is in fact intellectual slavery to the Brown line.
Over the past week raised voices of condemnation have been shouted down as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate about ideas and values. It is in times like this that the responsibility to understand and articulate the truth is most paramount. A defensive stance of mere condemnation will just bring a sense of justified accusation, an attempt to highlight the peaceful nature of the individual aspects of Islam will hand intellectual victory to those who malign political Islam. Only real effort from the community to support the truth and ideas of Islam such as Caliphate and the right to question foreign policy will aid the cause of Muslims in Britain.
As for Winston his actions failed to follow his ideals and he eventually towed the government line and buried the truth under his own cowardice and self interest, one just hopes that this analogy won't apply to the Muslims communities up and down the country.
These are the words of Winston Smith the fictional character in George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four , in the book Winston is a clerk in the Ministry of Truth, his job to rewrite historical documents to fit the current party line. Winston writing the above in his diary ponders on how far the party, which in essence represents "the state" would go to rewrite the truth to fit it's own purpose, to you and me this means propaganda, to shape the views of people in a deliberate manner for a pre-conceived end.
Propaganda was something Gordon Brown in his first public outing as the new Prime Minister talked about on the BBC's Sunday AM show (Sunday 1/7/2007). Interviewed by an almost apologetic Andrew Marr when asked if he (Brown) thought there was a direct link between Iraq and London he commented
" The terrorist threat we're dealing with is about a long term and sustained attack on the values that we represent...... And that's why the cultural effort, almost similar to what happened during the Cold War in the nineteen forties, fifties and sixties when we had to mount a propaganda effort, if you like, to explain to people that our values represented the best of commitments to individual dignity, to liberty and to human life being taken seriously. And I think that's what we are going to have to talk about in the next few years"
This statement sums up the message Brown and sectors of the government have been giving since the failed attacks in London and Glasgow, the script reads "It's about them hating our way of life, they think our women are slags, they want to kill anyone that doesn't believe in their way of life", and this line has been spun out in a manner that would make the spin doctors of the early Blair years green with envy.
The discussion of values and ideas hasn't been limited to government circles with Channel 4 News, BBC Newsnight amongst those discussing these points too. A picture is now being painted about a cultural war between the West and the ideas of an evil ideology, an ideology which will rest at nothing to destroy the very fabric of modern western society, that calls for Shariah and the Caliphate in the Muslim world, and a people motivated by nothing but a hatred for the "freedoms" of the West.
A few days after the attacks BBC's Newsnight pitted Shiv Malik against Inayat Bunglawala of the MCB. One would think in this current climate the discussion would centre around the events in London and Glasgow and possible causes. However Shiv Malik's agenda was something different and the questioning centred around Suicide bombings; killings of British Soldiers in Iraq and the MCB's support of Hamas; none of which are relevant to the discussion about motivation for the attacks. This tone has been carried throughout the last week, condemnation is not enough the only thing will do as Brown made so clear is acceptance of Western values and acknowledgment of the fantasy that there is something intrinsically wrong with Islam which is in need of reform.
In the same week as the incidents in London and Glasgow , 2 US Marines where charged with the murder of the 3 Iraqi civilians in Iskandariyah, Iraq. This brings the total number charged with murder to 20 . In Afghanistan the number of civilians killed by air raids was over 100 from just two incidents. The link between the incidents in Iraq and the UK is obvious and clear.
However as Winston understood the propaganda machine is not concerned with the truth but a twisted version of it, that fulfils it's long term goals. Winston would be the first to understand that the British government is no longer trying to get a point of view across but twisting falsehood into truth, and furthermore showing the truth as something only a lunatic fringe could ascribe to.
Winston concludes his diary entry with a definition of freedom - "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows".
This is being able to articulate the truth without fear, this is not a feeling Muslims are used to in the current climate. As for what Brown calls individual dignity from the eyes of a Muslim it is in fact intellectual slavery to the Brown line.
Over the past week raised voices of condemnation have been shouted down as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate about ideas and values. It is in times like this that the responsibility to understand and articulate the truth is most paramount. A defensive stance of mere condemnation will just bring a sense of justified accusation, an attempt to highlight the peaceful nature of the individual aspects of Islam will hand intellectual victory to those who malign political Islam. Only real effort from the community to support the truth and ideas of Islam such as Caliphate and the right to question foreign policy will aid the cause of Muslims in Britain.
As for Winston his actions failed to follow his ideals and he eventually towed the government line and buried the truth under his own cowardice and self interest, one just hopes that this analogy won't apply to the Muslims communities up and down the country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
