Muslims more British than rest of population, survey finds

[Aptrgangr]

Muslims more British than rest of population, survey finds

UK Muslims-Citizenship

Many black or Asian people living in Britain feel stronger ties to the country than whites do, according to a new government survey.

The findings put Muslims at the top of the poll, led by 91 per cent of citizens of Bangladeshi origins, followed by Indians and Pakistanis, compared with an average of only 84 among the white population who said they felt they belong strongly to Britain.

The Citizenship Survey, which is published every two years, is aimed at measuring the success of efforts to help minorities integrate and encourage a common sense of nationhood.

The findings, which confirm the results of other surveys, are contrary to the negative images of Muslims portrayed in the British media.

An ICM poll published in August as part of the BBC Asian Network's Asian Nation season, found that Muslims felt more British than Hindus.

A Gallup poll in April also concluded that Muslims are more likely to identify with Britain and have confidence in its institutions than the population of the country as a whole.

The findings have led Muslims to question why the British government is targeting its community to integrate more, including specifically pressing madrasahs to teach citizenship.

In its previous edition, the Muslim News questioned citizenship was discriminately being forced only on young Muslims in their religious school, contrary to the evidence, and said that the government was being "blinded by untruths."

Muslims more British than rest of population, survey finds - Irna

I am anything but surprised, these aforementioned foreigners have any reason to feel comfortable and at home, whilst natives more and more feel they were not at home anymore. The question is how to make them to make a stand against this.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Aptrgangr

Muslims more British than rest of population, survey finds - Irna

I am anything but surprised, these aforementioned foreigners have any reason to feel comfortable and at home, whilst natives more and more feel they were not at home anymore. The question is how to make them to make a stand against this.

I don't think that you are grasping the underlying matter behind this all.

Citizenship and belonging: What is Britishness? (PDF) (Commission for Racial Equality, November 2005)

An excerpt:

WHO REGARDS THEMSELVES AS BRITISH?

At the most basic level, all British passport holders know they are British citizens. However, not everyone attaches any value significance to being British. In Scotland and Wales – and this was true among both white and ethnic minority participants – there was a much stronger identification with each country than with Britain.

Participant 1: I don’t see why [Scottish] people are so hung up on saying they are British because it’s what we are.
Participant 2: But I don’t want to be British. I want to be Scottish!
Participant 3: I don’t think of myself as British.

Group identification is a fundamental part of people’s own identity. Sharing a common social identity helps people to bind together. It may also lead to tensions between groups if, and when, memberships of different groups are seen as unacceptable or impossible.

Participant 2: I don’t either.
Participant 1: I do. I think of us as part of Britain.
Participant 2: No, but we’re Scottish.
Participant 1: Yeah but we’re British. We’re British. Your passport says you are British.
(White Scottish, Glasgow)

I’ll always say I’m from Scotland. I’ll never say I’m from Britain.
(Black Africans, Glasgow)

I’m Scottish and I’m from Glasgow. I know that the Zambia’s my country and that’s where I am from. I’m African. But people here have made me feel welcome; that’s why I don’t disassociate myself from being Scottish.
(Black Africans, Glasgow)

Participant 1: Scotland, Ireland, Wales are actually proud to be part of their own culture rather than proud of the British culture, whereas England is proud to be part of all of the cultures, or they see themselves as under the umbrella of British culture. We don’t. […]
Participant 2: I don’t see [Britishness] as part of my identity.
(White Welsh, Cardiff)

Participant 1: Welsh people see themselves as Welsh predominantly. My husband, he doesn’t call himself British, he calls himself Welsh.
Participant 2: I’m Welsh.
Participant 3: Yes. I am Welsh first. If somebody ties me down, then I’ll say I’m British. I’m proud to be Welsh, but not so proud to be British. Britishness for me is just a name. End of story.
(White Welsh, Cardiff)

I feel more, rather than being British, more Welsh.
(South Asians, Cardiff)

Participant 1: We see ourselves as being Welsh and not British.
Participant 2: Because even though I was born here, I meet people and they say: ‘Where’re you from?’ and I don’t say Britain. I say I’m from Wales. I don’t even mention Britain! I just say Wales!
Participant 3: We see ourselves as being Welsh, not British.
Participant 4: Yeah, I’m black Welsh, you know, if you’re born in Wales, you’re black, you’re black Welsh.
(Black Caribbeans, Cardiff)

Thus, across all Scottish and Welsh groups, regardless of participants’ ethnic backgrounds, national identification was much stronger than identification with Britain, although those identities were not seen as incompatible or mutually exclusive.

The situation was different in England, where there was a sharp difference in the ways in which white English and ethnic minority participants thought of themselves. Most white English participants saw themselves as English, first and foremost, but also as British. By contrast, most ethnic minority participants (except for black Africans, as discussed below) saw themselves as British, to the exclusion of any identification with England, since they strongly associated England with white English people.

Participant 1: I don’t have as much pride in being British, as I did in being English.
Participant 2: I don’t make such a big difference between English and British. I think I’m English or British, both.
Participant 3: Well, whilst I am proud to be British, I am more proud to be English. Englishness comes first.
(White English, Manchester)

Participant 1: We are British. We are not English. English is white people. British is everyone […]
Participant 2: I feel British because I’m living here from quite a long time and my children are born and brought up here, born and educated here, and my next generation will be in this country. So I feel I am very much a British.
(Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, London)

We are British Asians. We are certainly not English, even if we live in this country.
(Indians, Birmingham)

The first thing that comes to mind when you say English is a white person. You don’t see a black person as English.
(Black Africans and black Caribbeans, London)

Thus, perhaps against expectations, it would seem that ethnic minority participants (except for black Africans) who lived in England were the ones who most strongly identified themselves as British. However, their identification, as with all other social groups, was not exclusively with Britain: it also drew on other ‘memberships’. We now turn to these alternative or complementary sources of social identification.

[Aptrgangr]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

I don't think that you are grasping the underlying matter behind this all.

Citizenship and belonging: What is Britishness? (PDF) (Commission for Racial Equality, November 2005)

An excerpt:

Why not?
I am well aware today everyone is Brit that owns a British passport.
Maybe a similar survey about Spain exists - I am sure several Peruvians consider themselves as Spaniards, Ecuadorians are convinced to be real Catalunyans, some Mexicans do not want to be called Spaniards but Basques...
Liberal democracies made any citizenship-laws an absurd spectacle.
Any national policy that denies racial and ethnic criterias is uttely worthless from the beginning on.

[bombadillo]

Thus, perhaps against expectations, it would seem that ethnic minority participants (except for black Africans) who lived in England were the ones who most strongly identified themselves as British. However, their identification, as with all other social groups, was not exclusively with Britain: it also drew on other ‘memberships’.

They have a point. "English" is defined ethnically: no African or Pakistani can ever be "English"; however that person can be a citizen of an increasingly multicultural state that isn't ethnically defined and support that state for the (limited) protections and rights it affords. Especially as most of these people have come from failed or failing states and hence are more keenly appreciative of what's on offer than those like me who've had it their whole lives. That doesn't make the influx right, of course, but I'm explaining the logic (as I see it) from their point of view.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Aptrgangr

Why not?
I am well aware today everyone is Brit that owns a British passport.
Maybe a similar survey about Spain exists - I am sure several Peruvians consider themselves as Spaniards

No. Take into account that 'British' was made near synonimous with eg. Commonwealth citizen even before immigration started to be a issue.

Ecuadorians are convinced to be real Catalunyans, some Mexicans do not want to be called Spaniards but Basques...

Only when they are politically assimilated into one of the so-called 'nationalist' (independentist) parties, such as is the case of the Cuban representative for ERC in Girona (Catalonia).

Which is, by the way, funny if you hear her stating the obvious, that she is not Spanish..

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

I don't think that you are grasping the underlying matter behind this all.

Citizenship and belonging: What is Britishness? (PDF) (Commission for Racial Equality, November 2005)

An excerpt:

that's a Good point; the traditional ethnic groups of Britain are bond to their own ethnicity (scott, welsh, gael, whatever)and second thez survey says:
Many black or Asian people living in Britain feel stronger ties to the country than whites do, according to a new government survey.

The findings put Muslims at the top of the poll, led by 91 per cent of citizens of Bangladeshi origins, followed by Indians and Pakistanis, compared with an average of only 84 among the white population who said they felt they belong strongly to Britain.

Is it so amazing, given that those minorities has appropriated for themselves the concept of Britishness?

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Originally Posted by bombadillo

They have a point. "English" is defined ethnically: no African or Pakistani can ever be "English"; however that person can be a citizen of an increasingly multicultural state that isn't ethnically defined and support that state for the (limited) protections and rights it affords. Especially as most of these people have come from failed or failing states and hence are more keenly appreciative of what's on offer than those like me who've had it their whole lives. That doesn't make the influx right, of course, but I'm explaining the logic (as I see it) from their point of view.

So you wish to say, if I understood you correctly, that a Pakistani or a Nigerian can be British, because "British" is not a nation, but merely a non-ethnic state defined mostly by citizenship, but no Pakistani can ever be an Englishman, because English is ethnicity?

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by searcher of truth

Many black or Asian people living in Britain feel stronger ties to the country than whites do, according to a new government survey.

That shouldn't come as a surprise. The bond of a Black or an Asian with the country is dependable on the political status or system, whereas for a White the bonds are larger and assumed for granted. Therefore a Black or an Asian has to clinge to it with more strength than a White.

Is it so amazing, given that those minorities has appropriated for themselves the concept of Britishness?

Well, they have not 'appropriated' it. They were designed into it, long ago.

Originally Posted by Plethon

So you wish to say, if I understood you correctly, that a Pakistani or a Nigerian can be British, because "British" is not a nation, but merely a non-ethnic state defined mostly by citizenship, but no Pakistani can ever be an Englishman, because English is ethnicity?

That would be correct.

[Kernunnos]

Originally Posted by Plethon

So you wish to say, if I understood you correctly, that a Pakistani or a Nigerian can be British, because "British" is not a nation, but merely a non-ethnic state defined mostly by citizenship, but no Pakistani can ever be an Englishman, because English is ethnicity?

This is what the whole Europe is meant to become by immigration from non-european countries, a big Commonwealth that produces so much economic growth ... or a big second Yugoslavia.

Sounds eerily familiar, Phleton, eh?

[Susi]

Originally Posted by Plethon

So you wish to say, if I understood you correctly, that a Pakistani or a Nigerian can be British, because "British" is not a nation, but merely a non-ethnic state defined mostly by citizenship, but no Pakistani can ever be an Englishman, because English is ethnicity?

Mmm, I would argue that "Britain" implies some ethnicity with some people who are not aware that there are different nations making up the Union (i.e. Britain).

But to answer the question, as Mynydd did, no, a Pakistani cannot be an Englishman/woman/amoeba because English is an ethnicity, not a state-designation.

Originally Posted by searcher of truth

Is it so amazing, given that those minorities has appropriated for themselves the concept of Britishness?

The concept was multicultural to begin with, but in my opinion, it had its own boundaries.

[bombadillo]

Originally Posted by Plethon

So you wish to say, if I understood you correctly, that a Pakistani or a Nigerian can be British, because "British" is not a nation, but merely a non-ethnic state defined mostly by citizenship, but no Pakistani can ever be an Englishman, because English is ethnicity?

Mynydd has already answered for me, but let me add a few words. "Britain" is the beginning of empire -- empire in its embryonic form. The Welsh, Scots, and Irish were forcibly made to join a "union" that was all about English hegemony over the British Isles. Of course, the passing of the centuries has never meant they became reconciled to the idea -- as one can see if one ventures to Wales or Scotland or Northern Ireland. So to me, being "British" refers to citizenship of a state, and not an ethnicity. In fairness, many so-called "nations" (most?) start life artificially, and the state has to enforce common language and customs. I think it was this way with France, and even England involved a mingling of Celts, Saxons, and Normans (the last really being Danes). The very idea of "nation" (and by implication, "nationalism") is of relatively recent provenance, emerging (I think) roughly after the Thirty Years' War and the Treaty of Westphalia. Most of us were just chattels and serfs belonging to lands that were parts of changing kingdoms and noble estates. Anyway, this is a long-winded, meandering, and possibly irrelevant response to why Pakistanis might think of themselves as "British" but not "English."

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Originally Posted by Breha

This is what the whole Europe is meant to become by immigration from non-european countries, a big Commonwealth that produces so much economic growth ... or a big second Yugoslavia.

Sounds eerily familiar, Phleton, eh?

Yes, and it is a direction towards which the EU is moving right now. Unless the trends change, there might be a Yugoslav scenario.