From multiculturalism to multifaithism

Harry’s Place and the National Secular Society draw my attention to this interesting paper by Pragna Patel that appears in Feminist Legal Studies.

The report, entitled ‘Faith in the state? Asian women’s struggles for human rights in the UK,’ discusses the government’s approach to religion since 9/11, which has involved treating all religious communities as ethnic blocs that all think the same way. They have pandered to reactionary and unelected ‘community leaders’ without taking account of tensions or problems within those communities. This has meant that women suffering violence or repression within faith communities have tended to be ignored.

Patel also discusses the censorship or attempted censorship of writers and artists by fundamentalists of all religions: from Jerry Springer to Behzti, issues of free speech have been ignored in favour of respect for religious traditions.

The common belief in faith as a good thing in and of itself, and the widely argued (but seldom justified) claim that faith groups have historically done a great deal for society’s less fortunate, has led to a situation where religious groups are showered with public money, involved in decision making and allowed to set the agenda no matter how archaic and small-minded they are, whereas secular groups like Southall Black Sisters - who really do care about oppression and injustice - are all but ignored.

As multiculturalism moves into a new phase in the U.K., the impact of “multi-faithism” on the state’s policies on domestic violence is clearly discernable. We have witnessed the development of integrated court systems bringing together civil and criminal courts and “one stop shops” designed to bring together different agencies under one roof, with the aim of providing a holistic, multi-agency approach to issues such as domestic violence. Yet in keeping with state policy on increased participation of faith groups, these new initiatives also seek to embrace “faith communities”. Organisers of such projects justify the involvement of faith groups by referring to the need to be “sensitive” to other (minority) faiths. In the process, such initiatives ignore the political struggles waged by black and minority women within their communities against domestic violence and the stranglehold of religion and culture on their lives. At best secular voices are taken into account, but they are considered no more legitimate than those of faith groups, even though faith groups have no history of addressing women’s rights or issues of social justice.

Emphasis is of course mine.

One point Patel makes which has not been covered so far is that involving faith groups in social provision actually fits in quite well with the privatisation drive. Religious charities work for free - they want your soul, not your money - and especially in areas such as substance abuse or mental health where there is no shortage of shattered minds to make potential new converts.

Emphasis is again mine:

Since the London bombings and civil unrest fuelled by racial tensions, black and ethnic minority communities, redrawn as “faith communities”, have been specifically identified by the state as important sources of social capital. There is a growing assumption that the social networks, experiences and resources of the “faith groups” have been neglected for too long. They are deemed to be invaluable to urban regeneration and therefore full opportunity is given to faith groups to build capacity and to participate fully in civil society. Interestingly, the approach represents the other side of the “War on Terror” campaign, since it is mainly Muslim faith groups that are deemed to be relevant to stamping out extremism and achieving social cohesion. This development happens also to fit neatly into a wider neo-conservative agenda, which sees as essential the privatisation of what were once considered to be vital state functions such as schooling and welfare provision. Faith groups have therefore been placed at the heart of the regeneration of communities and as a direct result, religion is becoming increasingly entrenched within state institutions at central and local levels, and is reflected at all levels of state policy.

I need to write a fuller post about this third sector issue, and I will.