Lessons in Hate and Violence

"We should be just as concerned about the treatment of Muslim children as we are about white children." - Ann Cryer, Keighley MP 1997-2010.

The mixing of religion and ethnicity there is one of the things winding me up about this programme I'm watching. In a documentary about faith schools, that statement carries an implication that White Children are synonymous with Christian children. That's the side of the mix up that irritates me. I'm white and I'm quite definitely not Christian. It's the other side that actually scares me, that Arabic and Middle-Eastern children are essentially Muslim. With support growing for xenophobic institutions like the EDL and the BNP, with our own prime minister announcing multiculturalism has failed, this is the worst time to be judging people based on appearance.

Oh Dispatches, you are raising such an important point, why must you tackle it so badly? I'm watching "Lessons in Hate and Violence", detailing their undercover investigations into Islamic faith schools in the UK and I am infuriated by the leading questions asked by the presenter. Questions like "Some of the teachings we've shown you, do you think they could be described as 'Hate Teachings'" asked to a teacher at the Muslim Education Centre of Oxford. I really feel like it weakens Dispatches' argument, rather than strengthening it. The evidence of malpractice, intolerance and abuse is all there on the secretly filmed tapes, plain as day. Why even bother interviewing people if you're going to put words in their mouths like that? It suggests a lack of faith in the strength of the material where it really shouldn't.

I'm being a little harsh, I know. It's actually quite a good documentary about an important subject with some horrible footage that needed to be shown but it's these little things here and there that distract me from the main point, that these unregulated or poorly regulated schools and madrassa are teaching messages of hate, are abusing the children while they do it and are getting away with it.

I'm a secularist. I believe religion is personal and religious institutions should not have an influence on today's society. I don't think we need a God to teach us ethics or to bring us together. One of the many things I dislike about Cameron's proposed Big Society is the increased emphasis on community run schools because a lot of them will be faith schools allowed to choose their own curriculum and discriminate against non-religious or differently-religious staff when hiring. It's not that I think the schools featured in "Lessons in Hate and Violence" are representative of all muslim faith schools or of faith schools in general. I don't like the idea that children are being taught not to think for themselves and that there exists authority that should not be questioned.

Honestly, I think education is one aspect of government that cannot be delegated to local councils and communities and certainly not to agenda driven religious or political groups. Education is far too important not to be regulated nationally. Though thinking about it, I'd like most aspects of government to be regulated nationally. I like big government. But education most of all.

There's a quote from The West Wing I'm going to end on. I was hoping to find it on YouTube but you'll have to read it instead.

"Education is the silver bullet. Education is everything. We don't need little changes, we need gigantic, monumental changes. Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be making six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense. That's my position. I just haven't figured out how to do it yet. "