Niccolo Machiavelli: An Explanation.

Niccolo Machiavelli, the Florentine statesman and political thinker, was born in 1469. Yet over five hundred years on, Machiavelli’s name is intrinsically tied to modern political thought, ideology, and analysis; synonymous with amorality, deceit, and cunning. Quentin Skinner describes how Machiavelli has played a prominent role in political life since the fifteenth century, detailing how Shakespeare referred to “The murderous Machiavel”, Edmund Burke described the “odious maxims of Machiavellian policy” and Marx and Engels berated such policies as “paralysing democratic energies” (Skinner, 1981, p1).  

For many years politicians, and active participants in the world in which they operate, countered any links with Machiavelli or his workings. Henry Kissinger, Presidential advisor to Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford in the 1970’s famously refuted any comparison with Machiavelli, despite the continued association. Other politicians have not shied away from such judgement; Peter Mandelson, a key founder of Britain’s New Labour party appeared to revel in his moniker of ‘Dark Prince’, inspired by Machiavelli’s most famous work.  However, his shady reputation in the upper echelons of government, power-brokering in the shadows of Westminster, earned him few admirers outside his power-circle centred at the top of government.

So with much of the negativity of modern twenty-first century politics neatly tied in a range of terms under one man’s name, Machiavelli seemingly plays the role of perpetrator for man’s governmental sins. But why so? How have the works of Machiavelli resulted in such an infamous legacy, and more importantly, is it an accurate one?

In order to understand Machiavelli, his works, and his legacy, we must first look at the life he led. Born the son of a civil lawyer in fifteenth century Florence, Machiavelli was from modest stock but received a classical education, at the time deemed essential for political men.

The city of Florence in northern Italy had always considered itself a Republic, however for much of the fifteenth century Florence had been an oligarchy dominated by the rule of one banking family, the Medici. The collapse of Medici rule, the reestablishment of the Republic under Savonarola in 1494, and the continuation of this by Soderini in 1498 eventually led to Machiavelli’s introduction to politics (Anglo, 1984).

He was first appointed in to civil service at the age of twenty-nine, fulfilling the role of Chancellor to the Second Chancery with special responsibilities in the fields of militia and foreign affairs. This diplomatic role saw him dispatched across Europe during a period of time in which Sydney Anglo, describes Italy as “hapless” and “playing the battle-ground for European nation-states” (Anglo, 1984, p73). This, Anglo suggests, was a humiliating experience for Machiavelli, but it was also the most rigorous political training he could have undertaken. However, for all his endeavours, Machiavelli’s diplomatic career was circumstantially doomed by his comparatively lowly social status to that of his peers, preventing him from appointment as a full ambassador of the Republic.

Machiavelli’s involvement in military affairs had rather different results. The small town of Pisa had become an increasing embarrassment to the Florentine Republic, as they failed at it’s capture, despite numerous attempts. Soderini thus empowered Machiavelli to create a new militia with a mind to it’s capture. By December 1506 Machiavelli published Discourse on Florentine Military Preperation, calling upon his experience of European embattlement witnessed upon his travels. Within a month a new magistracy was created; the Nine of the Militia, and Machiavelli appointed it’s Chancellor. Eventually, in 1509 Pisa succumbed to Machiavelli’s infantry, and his military career reached optimum status. As such he was entrusted with further military responsibilities on behalf of the Florentine Republic, increasing his influence and power (Anglo, 1984).

However, Machiavelli’s public endearment was short lived. By 1512, the Republic surrendered to a Spanish army supported by Pope Julius II; Soderini fled, Republican institutions were banished and Machiavelli found himself out of work. The Medici once again returned to oligarch status, and the former Chancellor to the Nine of the Militia was wrongly accused of a plot to rid them of their recouped power. Tortured, Machiavelli was eventually released without charge, but remained under suspicion for several years (Skinner, 1981).

Following his trial, Machiavelli retired from public life for fourteen years, a period in which much of his most acclaimed work was created. But in 1526, he again found himself eligible for office and his longing for employment led to election as the Chancellor responsible for the city’s fortifications, albeit it under Medici rule. The small pleasure Machiavelli received from a return to office was short lived; one year after returning to Florentine politics, the Medici administration collapsed. The Republic was re-established and Machiavelli was once again overlooked. One year later, on 21 June 1527, Niccolo Machiavelli died from a long term illness (Niccolo Machiavelli 1469-1527, 2011).

His lifetime in politics had been famous in varied moments, the capture of Pisa most notably, but ultimately Machiavelli can be seen to have been overlooked and at times underestimated in office. It was many years later, when much of the work completed during his enforced retirement from public life was released that he would become most eminent. Through the release of The Prince, The Discourses, The Art of War and The Florentine History, Machiavelli would live on; receiving much greater acknowledgment, both good and bad, posthumously.

The first piece Machiavelli worked on during his exile was to become his most famous. The Prince, although published many years after his death, was written around 1513 and was to be an advisory to the new Medici Prince on how to “gain, hold, and increase political power” (Anglo, 1984, p77). Unlike many of the political thinkers of his era, Machiavelli set out within The Prince to separate political morality from Christian ethics, divorcing practicality from ethics in an early establishment of what we now understand as ‘realpolitik’. Inspired by historical examples such as that of Cesare Borgia, whom he had known personally, Machiavelli detailed how he believed a successful prince should be ruthless, as it is more advantageous to be feared rather than loved, he writes:

“This leads to the debate: Is it better to be loved than feared, or the reverse?  The answer is that it is desirable to be both, but because it is difficult to join them together, it is much safer for a prince to be feared than loved, if he is to fail in one of the two.”

(Knowles, 2004, p502)

Machiavelli goes on to explain how the prince should only keep his word for as long as it is of use to him, and no longer, such acts of ruthlessness can be justified he suggests when he writes:

 “in the actions of men, and especially princes… the end justifies the means”.

(Knowles, 2004, p502)

The themes of cunning and duplicity are perhaps best analysed within The Prince through the explanation of the lion and the fox. Machiavelli describes both animals’ shortcomings: the lion does not protect himself from traps and the fox does not protect himself from wolves. In order for the prince to succeed he must take on the role of both creatures simultaneously: the lion to frighten the wolves, and the fox to recognize the traps (Lukes, 2001).

Machiavelli also discussed Man’s, and indeed the prince’s, power to mould his own destiny.  He referred to two polarities throughout his works which first came to prominence in The Prince, known as fortuna and virtu. These two opposing forces according to Machiavelli determine whether affairs are dominated by chance or whether they can be influenced by human skill or effort. Fortuna, Machiavelli describes as what he believes is manifest in most men’s lives, as they appear nothing more than subject to circumstance. Conversely, virtu he could see in only a few men; the power to control their own paths, and more specifically their political objectives.  In summary he writes “while mankind in general remains subject to the whims of fortuna, it is possible for some men, at least, to control a part of their fate” (Anglo, 1984).

From this brief overview we begin to understand how Machiavelli believed that the virtu of one man alone would be enough to re-establish Florence, and create a strong stable society; however we understand the measures by which Machiavelli would have the prince act, albeit interim, would be violent, and not least cut-throat.

Following The Prince, Machiavelli went to work on The Discourses between 1513 and 1519. The examination of Rome’s political and military institutions was based largely upon Livy’s account of Roman history. Throughout this work Machiavelli once again assessed his views on the nature of man, discussing the deep lying corruption throughout all Italian states and republics.  He goes onto explain that corruption cannot forever be held at bay, not even within the great Roman Empire, as all men have their downfalls. Once again he expels how the fortuna of the many must be overcome by the virtu of “an almost royal hand” (Anglo, 1984, p81). This had already been discussed in principle in The Prince, but in The Discourses Machiavelli goes on to develop his thoughts on the prince’s virtu in to detailed explanations of the importance military expertise, revealing that in order for the prince to triumph his focus must be largely upon battle (Machiavelli, 2003).

The Art of War, written between 1519 and 1520 was Machiavelli’s next focus and the only piece of work published during his lifetime. Following on from the reiterated importance of military expertise in The Discourse, Machiavelli sets out what he believes to be ideal military practice. Although he details exact information on what he believes to be the best forms of recruitment, technique, movement, and organisation, the explicit focus of The Art of War is one of promoting good citizenship through military discipline, reiterating his work in both The Prince and The Discourses that strong laws are controlled by strong arms (Paret, 1986).

Machiavelli’s final work, The Florentine History, written between 1520 and the year of his death 1527, told the story of Florence’s Republic up until 1492. In the broader Italian context Machiavelli details how corruption, explicitly in Florence, had crept into political life as a result of lacking military prowess. This account furthered his initial explanation of corruption stemming from weak militia in The Discourses and provided historical basis for much of the theory already detailed in The Prince and The Art of War.

It has been argued by many that the works of Machiavelli can be difficult to tie down; that the historical basis of one of his theories, can just as easily act as an opponent to another of his concepts.  In The Prince Machiavelli details how the virtu of a prince can be the saviour of the Florentine Republic, and then in both The Discourses and The Art of War he describes the degeneration of the Roman Empire by way of imperial corruption as a result of republican virtu. This has been the cause of criticism for some, but Machiavelli’s intent is clear however contradictory his theories may or may not be; the establishment of a solid republic for the people of Florence was his ultimate goal.

In order to understand whether Niccolo Machiavelli is misrepresented in the twenty-first century we must appreciate not only the content of his work, but the core values and beliefs which he hoped would be extracted from them.

Machiavelli clearly calls upon his views of human nature within his workings. Through the phenomenon of fortuna he explains how he believes most men are not in control of their own destiny, and as such are more inclined to the evils of corruption and fickle behaviour, within The Prince he writes:

“Let no one oppose this belief of mine with that well-worn proverb: ‘He who builds on the people, builds on mud.’”

(Knowles, 2004, p502)

This quotation expresses Machiavelli’s preference for a strong single leader. However, it is also clear that he believes human shortcomings can be remedied.  Sydney Anglo writes:

“It is, he feels, possible both to devise and to teach rules for effective political behaviour, to persuade men to eschew wickedness; to inspire them to selflessness; and to awaken a civic spirit. This is why he writes at all.”

(Anglo, 1984, p78)

These two quotations in tandem exemplify the contrasting nature of Machiavelli’s writing vividly, and yet when placed in context of The Prince we clearly comprehend, if not agree with, his stance on human nature.  He believed that whilst the people of the Florentine Republic were often undesirably stricken to selfish actions, they could be, with the right leadership, a selfless and successful people.

One very apparent reasoning for the longevity of Machiavelli’s presence in political thought since the fifteenth century is clearly the foundation of his works in his opinion of human nature.  Anthony D’Amato writes:

 “Despite the atomic bomb, we have a high degree of sameness of man today with the human model analysed by Machiavelli”

(D’Amato, 1972 ,p210)

Jonathan Powell, former Chief of Staff to Tony Blair and author of The Modern Machiavelli agrees:

“If you look back at Machiavelli’s The Prince, the lessons still on the hole apply, even though it is five hundred years later. I think it’s because Machiavelli got to human nature; instead of trying to base things on theology or utopias, he looked at what was real.”

(Today, 2010)

These two explanations of Machiavelli’s relevance go a long way to explaining why we are familiar with his work in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries respectively, but they do not give answer to why the connotations associated with his name exist.

From the analysis of his work, most notably The Prince, we have come to understand that Machiavelli believed only a ruthless leader would return Florence to a stable republic. Through the cunning of the fox and the strength of the lion, he alleged the end would justify the means, as one man’s virtu remedied the fortuna of the many.

With this in mind we must understand the context of Machiavelli’s work. During a blood soaked period of European and indeed Italian history, The Prince was to be seen as a guide to the new Medici ruler on how to establish order in Florence. But, Machiavelli only believed these measures to be temporary; necessary to stabilise the Florentine state and lead to an eventual re-establishment of republican rule (Niccolo Machiavelli 1469-1527, 2003).  

When beginning to draw a conclusion, Niccolo Machiavelli’s most intellectual work; the separation of theology from political practice and leadership, should be seen as the very foundation of much of our modern world and the phenomenon of realpolitik. He can be viewed as one of the first realist political thinkers, and as such should be held in high regard. However, his preference for cunning and deceit, in the form of recommendation to the new prince of Florence in 1513, appears to have overshadowed much of his work, controlling his legacy as an evil, dark figure.

Placing Machiavelli’s political thoughts in context is paramount when analysing the intent of his work; and whilst human nature has changed little over five hundred years, circumstance has. And so, if to be Machiavellian is to believe in the use of immoral behaviour in order to achieve gain, then Niccolo Machiavelli is not so. However, if to believe in the implementation of realpolitik alongside strong leadership and strong law is Machiavellianism, then Machiavelli is as Machiavellian as they come. Unfortunately, in the twenty-first century, as in every century following his death, the former appears to supersede the latter.

Bibliography

ANGLO, Sydney (1984). Niccolo Machiavelli: the anatomy of political and military decadence. In: D’AMATO, Anthony (1972). The relevance of Machiavelli to contemporary world politics. In: PAREL, Anthony (ed). The Political Calculus. Totonto, University of Toronto Press.

HEYWOOD, Andrew (2000). Key Concepts in Politics. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

HEYWOOD, Andrew (2007). Politics, 3^rd Edition. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

JONES, Jonathan (2005). How to win at politics. [online]. The Guardian, 12 January. Last accessed 18 November at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/jan/12/arts.politicsphilosophyandsociety

KNOWLES, Elizabeth (ed) (2004). Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. 6^th ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press.

LUKES, Timothy (2001). Lionizing Machiavelli. ProQuest Education Journals, 95(3), 561- 575.

MACHIAVELLI, Niccolo (2003). Discourses on Livy. Translated by Julia Conaway Bondanella and Peter Bondanella. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

MANDELSON, Peter (2010). The Third Man. Harper Press, London.

Niccolo Machiavelli 1469-1527 (2011). [online]. Last accessed 19 November 2011 at: http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199231331/01student/keythinkers/machiavelli/

PAREL, Anthony (ed). The Political Calculus. Totonto, University of Toronto Press.

PARET, Peter (ed) (1986). Makers of Modern Strategy. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

REDHEAD, Brian, et al. Plato to Nato. London, BBC, 73-84.

SKINNER, Quentin (1981). Machiavelli. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Today. The modern Machiavelli. (2010) [radio broadcast]. BBC Radio 4. 14 October.

WILDE, Norman (1928). Machiavelli. International Journal of Ethics, 38(2), 212-225.

500 words on: Europe's connection with the emerging markets.

The financial superpower of Europe has changed drastically since 2007. The recently agreed Greek bailout and the unfolding political pantomime of Berlusconi’s Italy are testament to the continuation of these changes to this day. The established economic regions are not the only ones changing, in 2011 we are very aware of the BRIC economies and to a lesser extent the emerging Next Eleven: Korea, Mexico, Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Iran, the Philippines and Vietnam.

Through the European Union, ‘Europe’ and it’s 27 member states trade with one another and the world. This collective style of interaction is designed to promote wide-spread European prosperity and protection, and via international organisations such as the G8 and G20, Europe is independently represented on the largest global scale. However, inter-European economic interaction in 2011 is enduring one of the most strained periods since the Second World War as EU member states find themselves engrossed in a battle to save fellow nations, and ultimately, a currency.

Since the financial crisis swept itself across the Atlantic in 2007, European trading has continued to feel the squeeze. The services sector continues to struggle, particular in the epicentre of London, where growth totalled at 0.5% in the last quarter (3^rd qtr. 2011) (BBC, 2011). Manufacturing in Europe has also taken a severe hit in recent years, meaning many of Central and Eastern Europe’s production hotbeds, such as Hungary and Slovakia, have severely slowed, and in the case of some industries stagnated.

The world’s emerging economies find themselves in varying positions in relation to the current state of the European economy. At one end of the scale nations such as Vietnam and Egypt, two of the ‘Next Eleven’ whom rely heavily upon their vast tourism sectors, and have suffered badly as European’s have less expendable cash. (Smithers, 2010). At the other end of the spectrum: China. Europe is China’s largest trading partner and it relies heavily upon European expenditure (EU, 2011).  However, although China’s economy is based largely upon it’s power to manufacture, it is increasingly supported by its services sector, unlike many of the ‘Next Eleven’ and various other manufacturing nations. For these nations, the stagnation of car sales in Europe for example, stunts their own growth as much as it does Europe’s. In this sense we understand the very global role of Europe’s economic power; the non-secondary production of a car in Krakow, not only means the non-sale of a car in Slough, nor does it only mean the non-financing of it’s purchasing from a German bank, but it also means the non-primary production of said car in Indonesia, Turkey or the Philippines (World Bank, 2011).

In order for the all of the emerging economies, large and small, to continue to prosper they clearly need the economic super-powers to continue spending. It is for this reason that many of the more developed growth economies have purchased European debt in recent years and continue to do so today. By propping up the European economy, nation’s such as India and China hope to see a return to economic growth in their own and other emerging regions, with much of Europe’s wealth returned via trade, and of course, interest (Morris, 2011; IBT, 2011). The connection of Europe and the world’s emerging economies is clearly two-way: Europe needs the most well-financed of the emerging economies to fund it through the on-going economic crises and eventually return it to stability. Meanwhile, all of the world’s emerging economies, big and small, need Europe to spend in order to recognise their full potential.

Bibliography

BBC, News. China overtakes Japan as world’s second biggest economy.  (2011). [online]. Last accessed 6 November 2011 at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12427321

BBC, News. Q&A: Greek debt crisis. (2011) [online]. Last accessed 6 November 2011 at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13798000 

BBC, News. UK economic growth ppicks up to 0.5%. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 5 November 2011 at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15535518

BOUGHEY, Simon. Beware the risks and flaws in Greek bailout plan. (2011) [online]. Last accessed 7 November 2011 at: http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2011-11-07/beware-flaws-greek-bailout?mod=promos 

CIA. The World Factbook: China. The Central Intelligence Agency. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 3 November 2011 at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html

COHEN, Benjamin (2008). International Political Economy. Oxford, Princeton University Press.

EMERALD, Group Publishing (2004). China’s industrial revolution. Strategic Direction, 20(9), 21-23.

EU, Trade Comission. Countries: China. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 6 November 2011 at: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/creating-opportunities/bilateral-relations/countries/china

GAMBLE, Andrew (2009). The Spectre at the Feast. Oxford, Palgrave Macmillan. 

IBT, News. India likely to consider Eurozone extra financing. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 6 November 2011 at: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/241991/20111102/india-likely-consider-eurozone-extra-financing.htm

KAISER, Emily. BRICs aid for Europe a tough sell in Asia. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 7 November 2011 at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/20/us-eurozone-brics-idUSTRE78J1DB20110920  

LINN, Johannes F. and TIOMKIN, David (2006). The new impetus towards economic integration between Europe and Asia. Asia Europe Journal, 4(1), 31-41.

MARRON, Donald (2010). 30 Second economics. Lewes, Ivy Press.

MORRIS, Ian. Eurozone crisis: What it means for East and West. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 7 November 2011 at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15619946  

SMITHERS, Rebecca. Fewer Britons taking overseas breaks as recession bites. (2010) [online]. Last accessed 7 November 2011 at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2010/jul/13/fewer-britons-take-overseas-breaks  

STUBBS, Richard (2006). Political Economy and the Changing Global Order. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

WORLD BANK, Report. Swimming against the tide: How developing countries are coping with the global crisis. (2009). [online]. Last accessed 7 November at: http://www.un.org/ga/president/63/PDFs/WorldBankreport.pdf

500 words on: China v USA

According to Guardian researcher Lisa Evans, America and China are changing. Whilst the former currently owns the largest deficit burden on the planet at $561 billion, the latter, runs the greatest budget surplus at $272 billion.  In her words the traditional “balance of power” leaning West appears to be shifting East, supported by the 7% gap in GDP growth, once again in favour of China (2.6% USA-9.6% China, 3^rd quarter 2010) (EVANS, 2011).

Prior to the First World War, the United States shifted from a simple agrarian nation to an industrial superpower. This was continued following the war until the Wall Street Crash of 1929 by such revolutionary industrialists as Henry Ford, rationalising the production process and creating the beginnings of a consumer society. Following the depression of the late 1920’s and 1930’s, the US found itself back on its feet. The Second World War further provided opportunity for work, and spending, beginning a period of prosperity that swelled throughout the 20^th century. However, this wasn’t without cyclical recession (Stubbs, 2006).

Moving in to the 21^st century, the United States’ economy had grown at a quicker rate than any other time throughout the 1990s, riding the dot-com bubble. Seven years later, and in the midst of another bubble, this time housing, the US economy was stretched too far. In the years between 1997 and 2005, housing prices in the US increased by 75% as banks lent money, without sufficiently safeguarding against the possibility of future defaults. The sub-prime mortgage, essentially lending over and above the value of a property, would eventually come to be a major part of what Lisa Evans describes as the shift of power from the US to China (Gamble, 2009).

China’s emergence into the world market began in 1978, when the ruling Communist party began implementing what it called “socialism with Chinese characteristics”. The mobilisation of China’s vast resources, both physical and natural meant that inception into the world market was both welcome and mutually fruitful. This integration continues today as China increases it’s stronghold with annual growth of around 9%. With a largely expanding population, currently at around 1.3billion, China has all the characteristics of a modern industrial revolution (Emerald, 2004, CIA, 2011)

However, it is believed by many that the size of China’s population may become it’s downfall. In order to compete with United States internationally, critics suggest that China will need to drastically improve quality of life for it’s citizens. The BBC reported earlier this year that whilst average incomes in urban areas have drastically increased annually, workers in China’s vast rural areas have remained on similar levels of income to that of twenty years ago (Tobin, 2011)

The elongated emergence of China is undeniable, as private wealth continues to increase, so does the nation’s desire to enter new markets. The very global nature of the Chinese economy means that it is highly susceptible to global fluctuations, a weakness that is by no means insignificant. However rising to be the world’s second largest economy in late 2010 proves that China is continuing to grow throughout a period of worldwide stagnation, and in many cases recession (BBC News, 2011).  

As President Obama welcomed Chinese Premier Hu Jintao to the Whitehouse in January this year, he welcomed a bigger lender to the developing world than the World Bank. It is the activity of America’s opponents, namely China, in this period that will decide whether the US can remain as the world’s economic superpower (Rodgers, 2011).  

Bibliography

BBC, News. China overtakes Japan as world’s second biggest economy.  (2011). [online]. Last accessed 26 October 2011 at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12427321

CASETTI, Emilio (2003) When will China overtake the USA? Journal of Peace Research, 40(6), 661-675.

CIA. The World Factbook: China. The Central Intelligence Agency. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 26 October 2011 at:https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html

COHEN, Benjamin (2008). International Political Economy. Oxford, Princeton University Press.

ECONOMIST, The. Down to the wire.  (2011). [online]. Last accessed 24 October at: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/07/americas-public-debt

EMERALD, Group Publishing (2004). China’s industrial revolution. Strategic Direction, 20(9), 21-23.

EVANS, Lisa. China v America. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 26 October 2011 at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/19/china-social-media#zoomed-picture

GAMBLE, Andrew (2009). The Spectre at the Feast. Oxford, Palgrave Macmillan. 

MARRON, Donald (2010). 30 Second economics. Lewes, Ivy Press.

ROGERS, Simon. US Federal Defecit: How much does China own of America’s debt? (2011). [online]. Last accessed 24 October 2011 at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/18/us-federal-deficit-china-america-debt

STUBBS, Richard (2006). Political Economy and the Changing Global Order. Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

TOBIN, Damain. Inequality in China.. (2011). [online]. Last accessed 26 October 2011 at:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13945072

Globalisation, Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim.

Globalisation is understood to be the ultimate force shaping our planet today; throughout this essay I shall draw upon the works of two of the great nineteenth and twentieth century sociological theorists respectively; Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim, to see how their descriptions of social change relate to this twenty-first century phenomenon.  

Whether economical, political or cultural, the term ‘globalisation’ refers to the spread of a certain idea or practice between groups around the world, for example trading, manufacturing or purchasing; removing barriers and deregulating communication. By doing so, societies, nations, and eventually continents become integrated through complex networks of interaction (Steger, 2003). 

Both Marx and Durkheim lived and worked before the full extent of globalisation could become reality, indeed this is still the case now, but in today’s world when economic globalisation creates huge flows of capital between nations, when political globalisation means UK law is partly directed from Belgium, and when cultural globalisation means someone in Bombay is just as likely to be an avid fan of The Wire as someone in Baltimore, we live in very different times to which they did. In fact, the term ‘globalisation’ was first used many years after the death of both of these theorists.

Inevitably, some view globalisation as good, some as bad. Some believe it to be the best hope of ending world poverty, others, as we shall see, believe it to be the spread of oppression. However, the merit of globalisation is not the focus of this essay, instead I shall discuss the differing processes from which Marx and Durkheim would suggest it has sprung.

For Karl Marx, social change was a result of social conflict, stating in the Communist Manifesto, alongside co-author Friedrich Engels: “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”. Throughout his life, Marx studied how societies changed through the course of history, from early hunter-gatherer societies, to what he described as ‘ancient world societies’, into feudal societies and finally the society we now live in; the capitalist society.  Whilst he observed that social changes often happen gradually, he noted that in some cases very rapid changes occurred (revolutions), and that technological advances were often the reasoning for this. But above all, as Macionis and Plummer state, “he steadfastly held that conflict between economic groups is the major engine for change” (Macionis and Plummer, 2008).

For Marx, capitalism is within itself a system of class conflict, from which all change is stimulated by the economy. Living through the early stages of industrial capitalism, he believed a small part of the population, those that previously fulfilled the feudal roles of merchants and landowners, had become the capitalists, or as he named them, the ‘bourgeoisie’; those that owned the factories and other productive enterprises.  The majority of the rest of the population, those that had previous to the industrial revolution worked on the land, now worked in the factories and other industrial systems and provided the labour necessary for production. Marx named these the ‘proletariat’, the working classes. Like earlier societies, Marx saw capitalism as being made up of two classes. However, differing from previous societies, Marx believed capitalism’s sole aim was profit, and that unlike horticultural and agrarian societies, capitalism was not tied by any codes of honour or obligation. Instead, profit was to be attained at almost any cost, notably the oppression of workers (Macionis and Plummer, 2008).

The initial expansion of capitalism was reliant upon the use of ‘surplus value’, the capital which remains after all costs of production are deducted, otherwise known as profit. Instead of dividing this surplus value equally amongst workers, the capitalists reinvested it, expanding their factories and industries. In order to increase this surplus value, Marx believed that the bourgeoisie would continually cut all productive expenditures, including wages, oppressing the workers as far as possible. This process of seeking to increase profit is where Marx would suggest the expanding nature of capitalism stems from. As well as minimising the costs of production, they also seek to inflate their capital gain by growing into new markets, in new places with new people. This can either be for the benefit of production or sale, but it is overwhelmingly with the aim of increasing profit.

All societies are composed of many social institutions; however, Marx suggested that the institution with the most power and direction to control social change in the capitalist system is the economy. Drawing on the notion of Materialism, Marx suggested that the other major spheres of social life- politics, family, religion, education- function under the direct influence of the economy (Ruben, 1977). Marx therefore described the economy as the ‘base’ and all other institutions as the ‘superstructure’. Simply, the economy, dominated by the capitalists, reinforces their dominance in to all other areas of social life. It is for these reasons that Marx suggested many of the proletariat believed that the bourgeoisie earned their wealth, while those without lacked the ability or knowhow to do so. This is what he named ‘false consciousness’; the belief that social problems are caused by individuals rather than society itself. This false consciousness implemented by the capitalist system of base-superstructure, he believed, obscured the real causes of the working classes struggles.

Finally, as mentioned, Marx believed that social change often relied upon technological advancement and the continued process of modernisation. As we have seen recently,  modern technology such as the internet, and global applications such as Twitter and Facebook, have the ability to organise and start, if not finish, revolutions (The Telegraph, 2009). Indeed he and Engels noted in the Communist Manifesto that without the explosion of science and technology in the nineteenth century the rise of the European bourgeoisie would not have been possible (Steger, 2003).

However, as well as promoting social change, Marx noted that technology also had the ability to act as a barrier to it (Macionis and Plummer 2008).He suggested that as capitalists produced technology to gain power over the world, the technology, and productive processes in which they are involved, would eventually assume power over the proletariat workers, creating a feeling of alienation. Whereas once workers had wholeheartedly interacted with fellow workers, products, and their work itself, Marx commented that technology would withdraw many of these functions and leave workers isolated.

From this very basic introduction to Marx’s views on capitalism, we can see several explanations for the expansion of social change globally. He suggests that capitalism is an expansive force, reaching out and searching for greater profit, in what we now understand to be a global fashion. In this sense Marx would suggest that all forms of globalisation are for the purpose of capital gain only. So as well as the obvious aims of economical expansion, cultural globalisation such as that of film and media, are also solely to create profit. Marx also suggests that the capitalist system, and the expansion of it, is innately protected by the false consciousness of the working classes, implemented by the base-superstructure and the control of the economy by the bourgeoisie.

Writing in the Communist Manifesto on the discovery of America, and the early expansion of European capitalism, he and Engels state:

The discovery of America prepared the way for mighty industry and its creation of a truly global market...The growth of industry, trade, navigation and railroads also went hand in hand with the rise of the bourgeoisie and capital which pushed to the background the old social classes of the Middle Ages…. Chased around the globe by its burning desire for ever-expanding markets for its products, the bourgeoisie has no choice but settle everywhere… Rapidly improving the instruments of production, the bourgeoisie utilizes the incessantly easing modes of communication to pull all nations into civilization- even the most barbarian ones… In a nutshell, it creates the world in its own image.” (Steger, 2003, p32).

From this description, thirty-six years before his death, we see that Marx had a very clear grasp on what we now describe as ‘globalisation’ and the important role of technology within it. By stating that capitalism ‘creates the world in its own image’, he and Engels not only refer to trading systems, but the whole base-superstructure which must be in place for capitalism to work in full effect; creating laws and privatising production in order for the bourgeoisie to influence all aspects of social life.

However, Marx deemed such expansion to be one of the final stages of capitalism, and in turn one of the final stages of the conflict model of social change. He believed that the capitalist system would implode as the continued search for profit lead to irreversible centralisation, economic depressions, overproduction and unemployment. In turn, he believed that eventually the proletariat would awaken from their false consciousness and that it would be replaced with ‘class consciousness’ as they responded and eventually revolted against the oppression and alienation they had been subjected too, bringing to an end the capitalist system and replacing it with a socialist and eventual communist state. Ultimately he believed capitalism, and in turn globalisation, were doomed to failure.

Although like Marx, Emile Durkheim believed in macro-sociology and the change of society as a whole, for him, social change was the product of evolution rather than conflict. Witnessing the rapid transformation of Europe throughout the nineteenth century, Durkheim noted and discussed the changes from what he named ‘mechanical solidarity’ to ‘organic solidarity’.

Prior to the industrial revolution, Durkheim believed societies to be tied together by mechanical solidarity, a likeness of traditions and bonds based upon shared morality. He called these common beliefs the ‘collective conscience’ and noted that social institutions such as religion played an imperative role in forming this phenomenon.  When discussing the views expressed by Durkheim in ‘Causes of Anomie and the Role Played by the Economy’ on religion in pre-industrial society, Ken Morrison remarks that religion not only enforces the collective conscience but also gives reasoning to citizens roles in society, placing life in perspective and teaching them that economic success is not the primary goal of life, further than this, religion compensates societies hardships by promising compensation in the next life (1995, p185).

It is from these simple societies, based in mechanical solidarity, that Durkheim believed holistic change occurred in evolutionary fashion, producing the complex global societies we live in today. He suggests that population growth plays an important role in social change, but above all else he notes society’s ‘division of labour’, the specialisation of work and economic activity, as the key process in the change from simple to complex societies.

The organic solidarity that Durkheim believed sprung from the developing division of labour was specifically due to the increasing specialisation of the work force following the industrial revolution, creating interdependency on a scale never before seen.  Morrison continues;

“As production, income and the division of labor began to develop more freely, the social threshold set by earlier periods became redirected. As a result, needs and wants- and even entire perspectives- are raised to a ‘fever-pitch’. The replacement of religion by economy subordinated society to economic and industrial ends. The intense economic focus of society freed desires from previous moral limits and replaced moral restraints with utilitarian sanctions inherent in law and social rules. Eventually , the extension and activity of markets acted to extend and expand desire.”   (Morrison, 1995, p186)

Here we see an explanation of how the changes implicated by the industrial revolution, not only changed the types of roles fulfilled by workers, but the type of desires that these new jobs and markets created. However, Durkheim warned that, the expanding nature of the new complex society, as well as widening the ambitions of workers, had the potential to be catastrophic. He suggested that when the economy replaces other social institutions, such as religion, in importance, the risk for social and moral insubordination is highly increased.

During his study of Suicide, and the phenomenon of ‘Anomie’, a lack of social norms created by rapid social change, Durkheim suggested that anomie related to the economy was one of the largest causes of suicide (Giddens, 2009). However, as the shift from simple to complex society occurs, Durkheim suggested that the mechanical features of likeness are replaced with the organic differentiation meaning social and industrial bonds now unite workers through difference rather than likeness.

Globalisation then for Durkheim, is based not solely upon the economy, but the global spread of the complex society. As such, he believed that as members of modern societies, eventually rather than being reliant on a few thousand people after the initial spread of specialisation, we would one day rely on millions of citizens interlinking, communicating and living in a truly global sense, all in order to secure the resources and services to live everyday life. He believed that as such, the societies partaking would become truly classless and wholly meritocratic. As we have seen, he warned that the advantages of modern freedom create a dilemma in which moral guidance is lacking, however, he believed that with the spread of the complex society and organic solidarity, a new form of moral unity, or ‘world patriotism’, would be sprung, recreating, in sorts, the moral guidance of the simple society and tackling the issues of anomie.

Comparatively, both theorists approach social change very differently, leaving comparisons few and far between. However, the main conflict between Marx and Durkheim would be that of false consciousness versus tradition and morality. The moral guidance discussed by Durkheim in the simple society, and the potential for it in the complex society through world patriotism is undermined by Marx, who suggests that any such institutions, providing guidance, are at the disposal of the capitalists. As we have seen, predictions for the future of society are also converse; however it is fair to say that Durkheim’s belief of growing interdependence is increasingly true in a very global sense. His hopes for the disposal of the class system have been slower in progress, but the growth of meritocracy has been faster paced, largely due to the barriers of the simple society, and the acceptance of them, being removed, at least in part by what he would describe as world patriotism. Marx’s hopes for the downfall of the capitalist system haven’t yet materialised, advanced economic systems have meant although crashes have occurred, recoveries have been much less catastrophic than Marx predicted. Finally, the hunger for social change by the working classes has lessened not only through their increasing wealth in the most modern capitalist societies, but also through the downfall of many high profile socialist and communist societies.

Bibliography

ANDERSON, James and RICCI, Marilyn (1997). Society and Social Science, 2^nd Edition. London, Open University Press.

BEAUMONT, Claudine (2009). G20: Protesters use Twitter, Facebook and social media tools to organise demonstrations. [online]. The Telegraph, 01 April. Last accessed 11 April 2011:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/g20-summit/5090003/G20-summit-Protesters-use-Twitter-Facebook-and-social-media-tools-to-organise-demonstrations.html

EMIRBAYER, Mustafa (2003). Emile Durkheim, Sociologist of Modernity. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

GIDDENS, Anthony (2009). Sociology, 6^th Edition. Cambridge, Polity Press.

HINKLE, Roscoe C. (1976). Durkheim’s Evolutionary Conception of Social Change. The Sociological Quarterly, 17 (3), 336-346

MACIONIS, John J. and PLUMMER, Ken (2008). Sociology, 4th Edition. London, Pearson Education.

MARX, Karl and ENGELS, Friedrich (1998). The Communist Manifesto. New York, Signet Classics.

MORRISON, Ken (1995). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: Formations of Modern Social Thought. London, Sage Publications.

RUBEN, David-Hillel (1977). Marxism and Materialism. Sussex, The Harvester Press.

STEGER, Manfred B. (2003). Globalization, A very short introduction. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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 7^th 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 11^th 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)