Wednesday 13 April 2011

The language of Human Rights, or the prose of Racism? A Critical Hermeneutic Report on the English Defence League Website.

Abstract
This report is based upon the English Defence League, and the critical hermeneutic analysis of their website; www.englishdefenceleague.org. Drawing from the debate on Islam in ‘Western’ society and more specifically in Britain, including academic works, newspaper and political literature, it argues that the issue of ‘Islamaphobia’ is an increasing one. It suggests that the website in question has racist undertones and that many of its statements, are intentionally misleading. The report concludes that through misuse of language, purposeful implication of semantic themes and use of images, the website seeks to create a feeling of both fear and hatred.

Literature Review
Since the catastrophic events of the nine/eleven disaster, attitudes towards the Muslim community across the world have become, in certain sections of society, increasingly strained.  Certain groups such as the English Defence League, have been founded on the basis of this, and can be seen as a reaction to the increasing fear, hatred and misunderstanding of Islam.

During an academic survey in 2002, researchers from the University of Leicester found that racist attacks and abuse took a steep incline in the Leicestershire area during the immediate aftermath of the New York Terror attacks. Research Director, Dr Lorraine Sheridan told the BBC that “The attacks are being carried out by people who don’t like Islam, the abuse is more about the religion than the race” continuing to remark that “The people behind the attacks think that Muslims are outside of society and that they are different”. Conclusions on the research also noted that the trend was increasingly worrying as Leicester had been said as a leading model of multiculturalism and integration for Britain (BBC NEWS, 2002).

Four years after the American Attacks, on the 7th July 2005, the rise of ‘Islamaphobia’ in Britain was again dramatically increased following the bombing of the London transport system by four young British Muslims, said to be linked to Al Qaeda. Once again, the attacks provoked angry responses from certain sections of society, The Independent reporting acts of arson and criminal damage against mosques in London, Bristol, Leeds, Telford and Birkenhead in the aftermath (Verkaik, 2005). Days after the attack, the British National Party distributed a by-election leaflet with the image of the devastated No.30 bus underlined by the slogan “Maybe now it’s time to start listening to the BNP”. 

Rapid social change, such as the discussed terror attacks provided, inevitably reminds us of Durkheim’s theory of Anomie, a sense of confusion over social norms and values stimulated by periods of fast-paced societal alteration. Five years prior to the London attacks, Islam played a much less prominent role in the lives of the majority of ‘Western’ society, however following them, Britain had seen two serious  attacks, one on their closest ally, the other on its capital, and a war on terror in which many Briton’s continue to lose their lives. The aforementioned actions of both members of society and certain political groups in response to this social change could therefore be seen as part of the anomic process (Macionis and Plummer, 2008).

In his 2008 work, ‘Thought paralysis: tolerance, and the fear of Islam’, Farhad Dalal suggested that fear of Islamic jihadists in Britain is still increasing, he believes primarily through a lack of understanding. Although there are many millions of Muslims living in Britain, he suggests that they remain largely isolated in society, and as such, the mystery surrounding them can lead to “all kinds of projections and fantasies” (Dalal, 2008, p90).

In February 2011, Prime Minister, David Cameron, stated that “We [Britain] have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream”. His speech gathered plaudits for its encouragement of interaction, but worried many, including large sections of the Muslim community for his promise to end multiculturalism in Britain, stating that those who failed to promote ‘British’ values will no longer be able to engage with the state (Kirkup, 2011).


Methodology
As this report is based upon the critical hermeneutic analysis of the chosen website, it is important to first understand what the critical hermeneutic approach is and what it entails.

Hermeneutics, in the simplest form, is textual interpretation, and it is closely related to Max Weber’s notion of interpretation; ‘Verstehen’.  As well as exploring sociocultural and historic influences on text, this approach to qualitative interpretation attempts to look beneath the surface and discover hidden meanings, influences and agendas. The critical aspect takes into account the context of which the text was both produced and is read, looking at the referent itself as well as the denotative and connotative meanings it produces (Bryman, 2008).

Linked to the critical social theory, aiming to identify contradictions within society, critical hermeneutics can be seen to challenge accepted normality and expose hidden power imbalances. German sociological philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer suggested that critical hermeneutics helps us to understand our prejudices through text, as our life long socialisation becomes not only embedded in our writing of texts, but our reading of them also. Each of us have different up-bringings, backgrounds and histories, therefore how we interpret text will also differ (Gadamer, 1960). It is for this reason that criticism of hermeneutics, and critical hermeneutics, suggests that any findings cannot be generally applied to texts, similar to criticisms of qualitative research more generally. However, a thorough piece of work, clearly presented and high in detail as well as explanation can offer a very insightful view of not only a text, but the issue it is concerned with.

With this in mind it is important to note that all text is produced in the context of its publication and interpreted at the time of reading. Therefore in this report it is important to take into account when the website was produced and under what societal circumstances, in order to understand the context in which it was created. As well as this, the time in which it is interpreted must be taken into account and what has changed since?

Having chosen the English Defence League’s website, I have decided to research a highly sensitive issue in Britain today, that of Islamaphobia.  In 2010, the PEW Research Centre, revealed that five per cent of Britain’s population are now Muslim (National Secular Society, 2011). Many groups such as the English Defence League fear the influence of Islam on British, European and Western society, and are said to be more specifically opposed to what they believe are increasing numbers of fundamentalist Muslims or jihadists.

The analysis of a website on such a sensitive issue will allow me to look at in detail the prose of a group who claim to be a human rights organisation concerned with the protection of their nation. By analysing and interpreting their website I hope to discover whether the English Defence League are as they say concerned with issues of human rights and the protection of all races, or whether they are in fact a racist anti-Islamic organisation?


Results
www.englishdefenceleague.org, is the official homepage of the English Defence League and is ran by the group itself. The website contains original materials, such as articles, speeches, images and videos uploaded exclusively to the site by the EDL, as well as including external sources from approved bodies and personnel, such as writers and supporters of the group.

The website is only available in English, which may be seen to exclude certain aspects of society, particularly those that the group are opposed to. Largely, the website is written in an informal tone, meaning that it is easy to read.

None of the pages within the site contain, relate or link to any of the negative press the group has had in the media and as such the site’s addressers are those trusted by the EDL to represent their organisation. The use of ‘journalistic articles’ aim to give credibility to the group and their site; however it is worthy of note that the ‘writers’ are likely to be members of the EDL or its affiliated groups. The addressees of the site are people looking for general information on the group, such as the general public, and they are also the members of the EDL seeking the specific information discussed below.

As discussed in the Literature Review, the attitude towards Muslims and Islam in Britain is a serious and popular area for discussion, with many different viewpoints. The referential function then of the website is to provide a place for the output of information regarding the EDL and their stance on the aforementioned debate. This information includes broad aspects such as the group’s political views, and also features specific information such as news, the organisation of events, reaction to phenomena and advertisements.  These key features are also the purpose of the website for its producer.

The key message throughout the site is one of warning against fundamental Islamism and its impact on Britain. A theme also prominent throughout is one of division, us versus them. The three specific pages which this report looked at: The Home Page, The Mission Statement and Testimonials, are often divisive, contradictory and threatening.

At the opening of the Mission Statement, the EDL accuse “certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain” of committing crimes including “molestation of young children”, “homophobia”, “anti-Semitism” and “support[ing] those responsible for terrorist atrocities” this is in reference to what they later describe as “fundamentalists”, “radicals” and “jihadists”.  However, shortly below they commit to “protect against the unjust assumption that all Muslims are complicit in or somehow responsible for these crimes”.  The latter statement can be seen as an attempt to protect the former.

However, as the text continues it is clear to see a theme of contradiction as references to Islam in general are used negatively, rather than the ‘certain sections’ mentioned earlier in the text. For example:

“The public must be provided with a more realistic and less sanitised view of Islam

“We also recognise that Muslims themselves are frequently the main victims of some Islamic traditions and practices.”

“...the often unreasonable demand that Islam is given more respect than it is due…”

The indexical “we” is also used throughout the website, and particularly in the Mission Statement to refer to the EDL as a group, rather than just the writers of the text. These also feature to create an addresser-addressee relationship when read, as EDL members relate to “we” as them.

The following words are also used in reference to not only the ‘certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain’, but British Muslims in general. Some of the words used can have multifaceted denotations, but in this instance they are negative, and as such act as connotations:

o   Thriving
o   Encroachment
o   Threat
o   Resentment
o   Unwittingly
o   Forced
o   Undermine

As well as text, the site also makes use of images, some examples of which are below:


These two images, featuring hooded, masked, violent looking men portray connotations of conflict and unlawfulness.

The images have clearly been used to intimidate any opposition to the group through fear of confrontation.

The nationalistic tone continues from the name of the group into the use of the St George’s Cross.

It is clear to see that the use of “signs” within the website have led to an interpretation of the text’s code as being multifaceted and with many underlying meanings and suggestions. The seemingly purposeful misuse of ambiguous terms such as “fundamentalists”, “radicals” and “jihadists” alongside terms such as “Islam” and “Muslims” is the prime example.


Conclusion
In conclusion, a number of underlying connotations appear to run through the text of the English Defence League’s website. The use of divisive language has been discussed and links directly to the work of Farhad Dalal discussed in the Literature Review. Dalal suggests that large parts of the Muslim society in Britain remain isolated, and as such, the mystery surrounding them can lead to largely unsupported fallacies, such as the accusations of molestation, homophobia, anti-Semitism and support for fundamentalism discussed in the Results section (Dalal, 2008).

The addresser of the text is also worth taking in to conclusion, as unlike many political forums for debate, no opposition to the group’s activities are allowed to contribute to the site. This means the content of the site is unchallenged and from one perspective only.

The use of images and semantics have played a key role in the analysis of this website, and an underlying theme of negativity and fear have been prolific throughout. The two images displayed exemplify the tone of the site’s prose.

The misuse of religious and sectarian terms creates for a confusing muddle of language, leading to what in part is the undeniable subjugation of the Islamic faith rather than the “certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain”.

This purposeful use of language creates a text in which, unless the reader has an understanding of the matter in hand, and the issues, groups and societies surrounding it, could easily be lead to believe that “Muslims”, “Islamists”, “Fundamentalists”, “Radicals” and “jihadists” are one and the same.

Finally, it is important to note that as Gadamer tells us, interpretation of text is subject to our own socialisation, and in turn; prejudices (Gadamer, 1960). With this in mind, we understand that the text is open to interpretation, and that the conclusions drawn are that solely of the author.




Bibliography

BBC NEWS (2002). UK ‘Islamapobia’ rises after 11th September [online]. Last accessed 12 April 2011 at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2223301.stm
BRYMAN, Alan (2008). Social Research Methods, Third Edition. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CHANDLER, Daniel (2003). Semiotics for beginners [online]. Last accessed 10 April 2011 at: http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/
ENGLISH DEFENCE LEAGUE (2010). The English Defence League [online]. Last accessed 12 April 2011 at:  www.englishdefenceleague.org.
FARHAD, Dalal (2008) Thought paralysis: tolerance, and the fear of Islam. Psychodynamic Practice, 14(1), 77-95
GADAMER, Hans-Georg (1960). Truth and Method. London, Sheed and Ward.
KIRKUP, James (2011) Muslims must embrace British values, David Cameron says [online]. Last accessed 31 March 2011 at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/8305346/Muslims-must-embrace-our-British-values-David-Cameron-says.html
MACIONIS, John J. and PLUMMER, Ken (2008). Sociology, 4th Edition. London, Pearson Education.
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY (2011). How many Muslims are there in Britain? [online]. Last accessed 1 April 2011 at: http://www.secularism.org.uk/how-many-muslims-are-there-in-br.html
VERKAIK, Robert (2005) Muslims call for calm after mosque attacks [online]. Last accessed 30 March 2011 at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/muslims-call-for-calm-after-mosque-attacks-498508.html)

No comments:

Post a Comment