Davies, Straw, Woolas ... playing the same card

It was at about this time last year that David Davies showed the more unpleasant side of his character when he said that the case of a Muslim teenager convicted of rape was linked to "barbaric and medieval" views towards women that had been "imported into this country". It was a deliberately inflammatory outburst which should have resulted in disciplinary action by the Conservative Party ... though of course they did nothing, showing that they are quite content to condone an anti-Muslim agenda if they think there is political advantage to be gained from it.

Now Jack Straw has shown us that the Labour Party can do exactly the same thing. He has blamed the attitude of the Pakistani community for the recent conviction of two men for rape, saying that they saw white girls as "easy meat". Though as a former Lord High Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, he has much less excuse than the more immature MP for Monmouthshire. Nor is this the first exhibition of his views, as he showed when he said he wanted Muslim women not to wear a face covering veil, and certainly not when talking to him.

In the case of both politicians, the problem is one of bigotry. By this I mean that both have singled out a particular group they are predisposed to criticize for something that applies just as much to people from other groups. They are either deliberately applying double standards, or are incapable of seeing past their prejudice.

In and of itself, rape is not an issue of nationality, race or religion. There might well be circumstances in which racial or religious prejudice is a motivating or aggravating element of rape or of other crimes, but that will be something for the courts to determine. In this particular case, the judge said that the race of both the victims and their abusers was coincidental.

Perhaps it is not so surprising that Jack Straw should take this opportunity to express anti-Muslim prejudice. This Thursday will see the Oldham and Saddleworth by-election, brought about because another Labour minister, Phil Woolas, chose to play to anti-Muslim feelings when he narrowly won the election in May. He was prominent in supporting Jack Straw in the row about veils, and a couple of years later raised the issue of inter-cousin marriage in Pakistani communities. The two could be said to be joined at the hip on this matter. Woolas might have been unceremoniously dumped by the Labour Party after the Election Court's verdict, but Labour certainly didn't criticize what he did at the time.

-

What are we to make of this? To me it appears that there is seam of political opinion in which politicians think they can keep pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable, pandering to the anti-Muslim feeling they presume must exist in the minds of potential voters ... an impression it is all too easy to get by taking the more rabid utterings of some of the gutter press seriously. But are they simply trying to take political advantage of feelings that are already widespread, or is it their intention to stir up and spread those feelings? I find it hard to believe that politicians like these would make such inflammatory statements without having a very good idea of what they want to achieve by them.

A nation, not a race

While I find Rod Liddle's explanation [comment at 12:37am, here] for his hatred of the Welsh to be much more laughable than he thought his original article was, I do want to sound a note of caution against those who are calling it racism.

Being Welsh is not a matter of race, and never has been. Nor is being English. The people of each of our countries are of many different races, with new ingredients constantly being added to the mixture ... whether over a thousand years, a hundred years or just the last decade.

Wales is a nation, and being Welsh is a matter of nationality, not race.

Nationality and Race

One would expect someone like Nick Griffin to deliberately misunderstand the difference between nationality and race:

     

But even I would have expected someone like Peter Black to understand the difference. However, from what Cynical Dragon brought to our attention today, he obviously doesn't:

Don't think that just by calling yourself 'The Party of Wales' you are actually the 'Party of Wales'. At the end of the day you are just a bunch of politicians like all the rest of us. And actually the difference between racial nationalism and civic nationalism is not that great! But yes Wales is a lot bigger than any political movement.

As for Plaid they define their nationalism by their Welshness thus their race forms part of their identity as a party.

Facebook

I'm reminded of the time I enjoyed on the WalesOnline forum making fun of their BNP poster. I didn't think it needed saying again, but it evidently does. So I'll repeat one of the shorter posts I made then:

I too "want to live in my own country, amongst my own people, in my own way". My countrymen and women include:
 

   

   

   

   

Anyone who regards race as a component of nationality is a racist.

I'd be more inclined to think that Peter Black has let the recoil from another of his cheap snipes knock him back into a hole ... which he could yet climb out of if he chose to reframe his words. But to judge by his attitude on Facebook, he seems to want to stand by what he said. That makes him a racist.

And if he or anyone else thinks I'm being harsh on him, my answer is that woolly thinking from people who should know better is one of the things that allows racism to take hold. Being Welsh is a matter of nationality, and the things that define one's nationality (in Wales, as in the rest of Europe and the Western world) have nothing to do with race. If you mix the two things up, you can never hope to stand against racism.