Weekly Worker 651 Thursday November 30 2006 Subscribe to the Weekly Worker

Islamists and infidels

Seyyed Ferjani from the Muslim Association of Britain and SP member Jim Hensman debated the rather broad question, ‘Which way forward for Britain’s muslims?’ Not surprisingly, the meeting lacked a certain focus - but also highlighted the SP’s confused and inadequate position on democratic questions, says Helen Broadhurst

Clearly, the comrades are keen to distinguish themselves from the Socialist Workers Party and its front organisation, Respect. A few SP members went so far as to view Ferjani as some kind of SWP substitute - and levelled a number of rather unfair charges at him.

Comrade Hensman, for example, accused the MAB of “using a muslim bloc to gain interests” and of not “organising on a class basis”. But why should they? The MAB is clearly a cross-class organisation with a bourgeois leadership and bourgeois programme. Another comrade accused “islamists” of killing gays. “You come here calling for unity,” he accused Ferjani, “but you call us communists infidels. Isn’t this just a cheap tactic?” It was easy for Ferjani to brush off such silly remarks. He said the MAB is a British organisation, which is thoroughly integrated into British society - it is not “the extension of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt”, as one SP member charged.

Others thought that “we should be careful about describing muslims as oppressed”, because in the workplace “black, white and muslims are all oppressed” and suffer equally from “poverty wages”. Another comrade thought that “islamophobia doesn’t exist - it’s an hysterical term, used by the SWP to make new recruits”.

While other SP speakers did not quite concur with this view - though there certainly wasn’t a debate on the issue and differing viewpoints remained unchallenged - the SP’s economism was clearly visible. ‘We’re all workers, let’s fight together for higher wages’ seemed to be the unifying theme. While most SP members might understand that muslims (as well as women, homosexuals, etc) suffer from double oppression, they are almost incapable of understanding that these issues require political rather than simply trade union-style answers.

Take the question of secularism - a crucial tool in the fight for the kind of society we aspire to. While both speakers failed to talk about this concept in their main contributions, Ferjani spent a good five minutes replying to a comment by the CPGB’s Tina Becker. The MAB fights for a secular society, he replied, “if we understand by secularism that there is equality for everybody and that the state does not interfere in religion”. We would further emphasise that this must entail the separation of church and state, and guarantee the equality of believer and non-believer, not just of christian, muslim, Jew, etc.

But at least Ferjani had some kind of understanding of the importance of this question. By contrast not a single SP member from the floor mentioned secularism, with many reading out prepared speeches about this or that local campaign, “where black, white and muslim workers have been fighting side by side against hospital closures”. If only the comrades knew how much they sound like SWP members at such moments …

It was left to comrade Hensman to make clear the SP’s position in his closing remarks. “Secularism is a thoroughly capitalist demand,” he said. “Nevertheless, of course we support it.” No points for guessing how much emphasis the comrades are putting on this “capitalist demand”.

Read on: The rest of the left Racism Weekly Worker archive

Print this page