Ideology of the English Defence League
[11]The political scientist Julian Richards suggested that one of the reasons that the EDL should be categorised as far-right was because of how many of its members acted, in contrast to what the group officially stated in its public pronouncements.
[12] He observed that "There is no doubt that a considerable number of people with basic Far Right sentiments, including a general dislike of foreigners and ethnic minorities and a sympathy for Nazi movements and ideas can be found in and around the EDL.
We welcome members from all over the political spectrum, and with varying views on foreign policy, united against Islamic extremism and its influence on British life.
[20] The EDL has also been characterised as being populist in ideology because of its claims to represent "ordinary people" against the liberal elites which it accuses of controlling the country.
[25] Despite its fragile and sporadic existence, [the EDL] maintains core principles founded on a dissatisfaction with immigration policies and a desire to mobilise against the spread of what it sees as the hostile alien culture of radical Islamism.
It hopes to defend the interests of the native population from the perceived threats posed by immigrants, multiculturalism and what it imagines to be the growing power and paramilitary forms of the Muslim faith in England.
[27] The political scientist Hilary Aked defined counter-jihadism as "a section of the far-right distinguished by its hostility to migrants, Muslims and Islam.
[38] Islam is perceived as being anachronistic, having failed to adapt to the modern world;[39] EDL members regularly referred to it as an "ideology" or a "cult" rather than a "religion.
"[40] Like other right-wing populists across Europe, the EDL present Muslims as being intrinsically culturally incompatible, and threatening, to European societies, [3] evoking Samuel P. Huntington's notion of the Clash of Civilizations,[41] as well as the idea of Salafi Islamist militant groups such as Al Qaeda that the Western and Islamic worlds are fundamentally at conflict.
EDL members characterised Islam as a threat to Western culture, presenting it as a misogynistic, homophobic, and dangerous force,[45] one which is discriminatory, intolerant, and hateful towards non-Muslims.
[46] Muslims are associated in EDL discourse not just with the oppression of women, Jews, and gay people, but also with terrorism, rape, paedophilia, and incest.
[56] Allen noted that "The EDL is creating and perpetuating meanings about Muslims and Islam, whether real or imaginary, accurate or inaccurate, representative or misrepresentative, that are clearly ideologically Islamophobic.
[59] In defining Islamophobia as a phobia or an affected prejudice—a definition rejected by the majority of academics and activists employing the term—the EDL sought to dismiss the concept as nonsense.
[22] Many placed this hatred in relation to local issues and personal experiences; for instance, EDL members regarded being poorly treated by an Asian shopkeeper as evidence that Muslims intrinsically hate the white working-class.
[72] A topic of particular anger was the role of men from Muslim backgrounds in grooming gangs largely targeting underage white girls.
[74] They also believed that Muslims legitimated such actions by reference to the fact that Islam's founder, Muhammad, married one of his wives, Aisha, when she was a child.
[85] It also alleged that British Muslims spend more time complaining about discrimination and attacking critics of Islam than eliminating extremism within their own ranks.
[43] EDL discourse repeatedly referred to what it called "Islamic supremacism", the belief that Muslims express a superiority complex over non-Muslims.
[40] Robinson for instance stated that "20 years down the line we'll be overrun by Islam",[32] while EDL rhetoric referred to Muslims "spreading across our country" and besieging the "patriotic people" of England.
"[92] Similarly, Richards quoted one young woman at a 2010 Dudley protest as saying that she attended because "I don't want my daughters to grow up having to wear the burqa.
[95] The group generalises sharia as a uniform set of rules, ignoring the fact that it represents a diverse and often contradictory range of approaches to Islamic jurisprudence.
[110] The EDL's attitude to nationhood is reflected in chants like "we want our country back";[111] the term Defence in its name presents English identity as something that is under threat.
[122] EDL members saw migrants as economic competition, outcompeting white British workers for jobs by working for less than the legal minimum wage.
[122] While accepting the multi-racial nature of England, EDL members almost uniformly rejected the ideology of multiculturalism,[125] portraying it as something mainstream politicians encouraged out of a desire to be seen as cosmopolitan and progressive and because of a fascination for the exoticism of other cultures.
[18] Individuals of Asian, African, and mixed heritage attended EDL events,[127] albeit in small numbers,[93] and the group formed specific divisions for Hindu, Sikh, Jewish, Greek and Cypriot, and Pakistani Christian supporters.
[134] From her fieldwork, Pilkington found that EDL members adopted a simple, narrow definition of "racism", using the term in reference to hatred for another race and believing that racial categories were rooted in biological difference and demarcated by skin colour.
[138] Explicitly racist language was also used at demonstrations;[139] one chant used was "If we all hate Pakis, clap your hands",[138] while a 2010 video from Stoke City features an EDL protester shouting at a police officer: "You fucking Paki-loving bastard!
[140] On its website, it contrasted Muslims with Sikhs, stating that the latter "have shown an impressive willingness to integrate, to accept the laws of the land, and to confront and defeat any form of extremism.
"[140] A Sikh Awareness Society representative spoke at an EDL event, where they noted that no other religious group has a "-phobia" attached to it, thus implying that Muslims were uniquely guilty in doing things to generate prejudice against them.
[145] Pilkington argued that this pro-LGBT rights stance was not solely a cynical ploy by the EDL's leadership, but reflected widespread views within the movement.
