After two weeks of violence in the UK, healing is going to take some work

By Sunder Katwala

Britain has seen its worst acts of violence and disorder in more than a decade over the last fortnight.

Far-right violent mobs, fueled by misinformation that a Muslim immigrant was responsible for the tragic stabbing deaths of three young girls in Southport, "retaliated" by attacking mosques, migrants and ethnic minorities.

A Britain-born Christian teen, born in Wales to parents from Rwanda, was actually responsible for the killings.

The misinformation did help spark the violence, but it would not have been possible without the latent prejudices that it sought to trigger.

Anti-Muslim prejudice

So how prejudiced is Britain? The long-term story is of positive change across generations. However anti-Muslim prejudice does have a broader social reach than most other forms of racism and prejudice in Britain today.

In 2019, one out of 20 people polled by the European Values Survey said they would not like to live next door to a Muslim. This may seem like a small figure, but broader casual stereotypes can reach a third or more of the population.

Encouragingly, there has been widespread political condemnation of and public disgust for the violence. Polling from YouGov recently found that 85 percent of people disapproved of the disorder. But 7 percent of people polled were willing to say they approved of it, including 2 percent who said that they did so strongly.

The first research into public attitudes on the riots found there was a majority consensus that those carrying out the disorder were thugs, part of the far-right and racists. However, a fifth of those surveyed described protesters as people with legitimate concerns, and a quarter of the public felt that Muslims were to blame for the disorder.

It is also striking how much opponents and supporters of the violence almost live in parallel worlds. Some 62 percent of that 7 percent fringe believed that the violent scenes of disorder reflected the views of most of the country.

Seven out of 10 people in this group said Muslims were responsible for the disorder. Those are indications of a radicalised core of around 3 percent or 4 percent of the population - which would still mean between one to two million people holding extreme views.

It is a large enough toxic fringe to create a fear that goes well beyond the mayhem they spread.

Government response

How should the government respond? Prime Minister Kier Starmer's new government inherits a policy vacuum on anti-Muslim prejudice.

The last Conservative government committed to a process to define Islamophobia in 2019 – but abandoned this without doing any work. Plans to appoint a lead adviser on anti-Muslim hatred - mirroring the approach taken with regard to anti-Semitism - stalled too.

The term Islamophobia, coined in 1997 by race equality think tank Runnymede Trust, is often used interchangeably in civil society and by politicians as a synonym for anti-Muslim hatred.

But some feel that focusing on the faith ("Islam") rather than the followers ("Muslims") can generate confusion about the intent behind the actions.

With regards to the UK government, an effective definition of Islamophobia should meet three tests: it needs to be legitimate with the broad majority of British Muslims; understood to be fair and to get the boundaries right by most of their fellow citizens; and be practically useful for those working in education, workplaces and civic groups as part of an effort to tackle every form of hatred and prejudice in a consistent way.

Most people would agree that it is not Islamophobic to critique ideas from a faith or political perspective; nor to debate, in good faith, the challenges of identity and integration in Britain today.

They would also agree that it is prejudiced to discriminate against Muslims for being Muslims, to hold all Muslims responsible for the actions of an extreme minority, or to have conversations that would stop if for example, a Muslim walked into the room.

A working definition is only the starting point. The aim is not only to raise awareness about the scale of anti-Muslim prejudice but also to reach the relevant audiences for the different challenges in reducing prejudice.

Challenges remain

Among these challenges - victims of prejudice need solidarity and support to report and prosecute hate crimes. Those with supportive attitudes should mobilise for stronger policies to tackle hatred.

Additionally, the deadly toxic fringe needs to be contained – by policing and prosecution, and through de-radicalisation efforts too.

The riots show the need for increased pressure on social media platforms, which are failing to recognise the boundary between free speech and the dehumanising promotion of hatred and violence.

The key to reducing prejudice is to reach into those sections of mainstream society who are more sceptical about British Muslims than other minority groups. Anti-Muslim prejudice is falling significantly across generations in Britain.

There is less of a sense of a "them and us" divide – in large part because young people have more positive contact, from an earlier age.

Meaningful social contact builds confidence and resilience – but it is unevenly spread across our society. There is more contact among young people in big cities than in towns 20 miles down the road from them, rural areas, or out on the coast where the population is often 95 to 98 percent white.

To help with the effort, every school should ensure all pupils do have meaningful contact with Muslims - and across all ethnic, faith and social class groups.

That may happen organically in schools in many cities, but it may require more proactive strategies, including school-linking projects in less diverse areas.

If the challenge is greater among older generations, creative thinking is needed about how to emulate the success of meaningful contact between pupils in ways that can engage parents and grandparents too.

In the long run, tackling anti-Muslim hatred cannot be the work of government alone. Broad civic participation will be needed to extend more meaningful contact to those least likely to organically experience it.

Only by forging closer and better connected communities can we be not just tough on violence and hatred, but tough on the social causes of prejudice too.

The author, Sunder Katwala is director of British Future, a non-partisan think-tank which works on issues of identity, immigration and race.

Disclaimer: The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and editorial policies of TRT Afrika.

➤ Click here to follow our WhatsApp channel for more stories.