Integration of immigrant groups into a host society may take several generations. Trying to force the pace, however that is done, is most likely going to be counter-productive.
Let nature take its course, so to speak, and integration will happen anyway.
Jews are generally pretty much well integrated into British society today.
If you read some contemporary opinion from the late 19th century and early 20th century, when Jewish immigration into Britain became a notable phenomenon, you'd notice that many of the same opinions expressed about Muslims today were being expressed about Jews back then.
That's true, many immigrant groups have successfully integrated into, say, British society. However, they did not do so in a framework of 'multiculturalism' nor did they do so in towns where the majority of the population (or a large chunk anyway) were of the same culture as themselves.
I'm not saying I think you're wrong at all, I just want to add that data from the past is not necessarily relevant to the present situation, which is different in important respects. When a fellow from Pakistan moved to Yorkshire in the 50s he was faced with a very different type of England than that which his compatriate encounters now. His integration was a natural consequence of the times, whereas now he doesn't have to integrate at all, other than with his own community. The large numbers of Pakistani Britons has become a barrier to integration that did not exist even 60 years ago.
Originally Posted by IvoShandor
But that's to ignore several significant differences between then and now. Fear of Jews then was based on rumour,on supposition and stereotype. Suspicion of Muslims now is based on real-although much may be misinterpreted and exaggerated-facts. There was never a Jewish 7/7 or Rushdie affair or cartoon affair. Such Jewish radical activities as existed were not based on religious principles but on political ones. The other difference is that the old integrative processes went in one direction,but it seems that in some segments of the Islamic community,integration has gone into reverse with the newer generation being more religious and more susceptible to radicalization than their fathers.
Some of this is because of specifically modern factors. The speed and efficiency of modern communications has meant that ideas-and people-can move back and forth between the Old Countries and the country of settlement. Young men can go back to say,Pakistan,to get married, and pick up dangerous ideas while over there, ignorant rural preachers that know nothing about the West travel west to mosques,Jihadi propaganda can be seen easily on the Web, Saudi money flows freely all around the globe. So some of the younger generations have a kind of split personality,divided between the call of Western modernity and some of the archaic and repugnant traditions of the past, and because of things like YouTube its not as easy to get rid of ideas. In the century before last emigration was a terrible,final thing,so there was a real feeling of starting a new life and shedding the old skin. Events in the Old Countries were easier to escape. Muslims in the past were more likely to think of themselves as British (or French or whatever) but these events in the broader world have interfered with this process and some now have an identity more strongly focused on religion as opposed to nationality or ethnicity: I remember hearing on the radio,about ten years, one young man saying vehemently "I am not a British Muslim.I am a Muslim who happens to live in Britain".
In the centuries past Jews in the East end were less likely to be disturbed by events in Jerusalem or Prague,and Moslems-such as there were then-were much less likely to have been bothered by the rise of the Wahhabi or the uprising of the Mahdi in Sudan. This is no longer true.
So I think the old notion of benign neglect is no longer an option.It's been the British-and Dutch and Scandinavian-way and and its not been-to say the least-an unqualified success. But what worked in the past may not necessarily be appropriate now.
Agree, mostly. Particularly the technology/communications aspect, that is very relevant. But I still think we are facilitating these bad ideas in a way that's incompatible with the benign neglect viewpoint. Why is the state paying welfare for multiple wives, for example, when such practice is illegal in the UK? We are also allowing these preachers to enter European countries to preach their hate without censuring them in any way. When a BBC (?) team went undercover to investigate a mosque (or maybe it was a madrassah) which was preaching hate, it was the journalists themselves who were investigated by the law.
There are definitely more 'activist' steps that need to be taken in certain communities in, say, the UK, particularly in regard to women. Wives who are brought from overseas into the UK, for example, often cannot avail of the freedoms we take for granted and this is an outrage.
Politics.ie is one of Ireland's leading politics and current affairs discussion websites with more than 600,000 visitors a month. Founded in 2003, Politics.ie has one of the most engaged, respected and influential politics and current affairs communities.