For a list of the current Friends of the Scottish Review, click here
For a long time the debate surrounding sectarianism in Scotland has become stale with cliches and finger-pointing taking the place of vigorous dialogue. While no sensible person wishes to see bigotry in society, there is still much disagreement on its definition, how much of it exists and the methods that should be used to defeat it.
One of the reasons for this is a fear of being stereotyped when you have a different opinion to those seen as an ‘authority’ on the subject. If you disagree with how anti-sectarian bodies work you therefore support bigotry. If you criticise the Catholic Church for how it approaches the issue you must be anti-Catholic, and so on.
When Conservative MSP John Lamont dared bring up faith schools in the context of sectarianism, he was roundly condemned in the most sickening language. Not only was the word ‘bigot’ loosely thrown in his direction, but it even went as far as comparisons to the racist south in 1920s America. Whether John Lamont was right or wrong, he had a valid viewpoint that many share. Yet it was not enough to disagree with him, he had to be shouted down and silenced.
It showed that, for some, exploring the full nature of sectarianism is not a priority. Last week the ‘Religiously Aggravated Offending in Scotland 2011-12’ report was published and Archbishop Philip Tartaglia responded by saying: ‘I am saddened by the latest figures on religiously aggravated offending. While most Catholics are safe most of the time, these figures show a side of Scotland which is truly unfortunate. Sadly, it seems incontrovertible now that our problem is not so much sectarianism but anti-Catholicism’.
Equating sectarianism solely with anti-Catholicism seems to be the stock response from the Church. It’s not only factually incorrect but it’s extremely unhelpful to those determined to end all forms of bigotry. Even the most obvious statistics of the report show that 353 charges (40%) were derogatory against Protestantism, yet this type of sectarianism is rarely discussed. In fact, even to mention that Protestants in Scotland are subject to hatred purely because of their religion is almost taboo.
Of-course the 509 charges (58%) that were derogatory towards Catholicism is equally unacceptable but surely we should be looking to help every victim as an individual, rather than as abstract representatives of a religious group? Having a set of figures saying there is bigotry against Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam and Judaism, yet coming to the conclusion that only your religion should be the focus is an unworthy response.
The report, and those of a similar nature, are also used as proof that all of the victims were targeted purely for their religious beliefs, when it says no such thing. In section 3.12 it clearly says: ‘The religious beliefs or affiliations of the accused or the victims of the offence are not formally recorded anywhere in the report as they are not relevant to the definition of the crime in the law. This report does not therefore present information about the religious beliefs or affiliations of the people targeted by the offensive conduct’.
It later goes on to point out: ‘The police were victims of religious abuse in just over half (51%) of the charges and were the most common target…The general community [ie singing in the street and no particular victim] were targeted in 30% of the charges and members of the public in 31% of the charges. Workers, such as hospital staff, security staff and taxi drivers, were targeted in 13% of charges. The majority of the victims were police officers and workers. This suggests that for the majority of charges it is unlikely the accused knew the religious affiliation/belief of the victim at the time of incident and that the religious abuse was more arbitrary in nature’. In all of those cases assault was only 4% of the total, with the majority being breach of the peace or threatening/abusive behaviour.
Sectarian violence based on the known religion of the victim does happen, but it is of a far smaller magnitude than is commonly supposed. The vast majority of offenders spout bigotry as a consequence of (and conduit for) their idiotic actions rather than as the sole cause. Calling a police officer a fenian or hun while being arrested, or singing sectarian songs in the street is still wrong, but there is a qualitative difference between that and targeted violence against an individual specifically because of their religious background.
The figures also show that crimes are committed in direct relation to the religious demographics. In other words, Catholics and Protestants commit sectarianism in the number you would expect if there was the same proportion of bigoted individuals within that group committing crimes, rather than a specific group problem. This is not a battle between communities. Families, friends, neighbours and work colleagues mix to the extent that it isn’t even noticed, yet we are told we are a sectarian society. There are six times more racist incidents in Scotland in comparison, yet few are rushing to tell the country it is racist.
Sectarianism is a primitive cultural baggage that I have always despised and I would disagree with those who say it doesn’t exist, but it’s mostly of a low-level variety and diminishing. Just because the pendulum has swung towards more civilised values doesn’t mean that we should start exaggerating or demonising others so that churches, politicians or anti-sectarian groups can gain more influence or use it to further their own goals.
There are plenty who agree with this, just as there will be those who disagree, but you would never know that there is still a debate when all we seem to hear are those who claim final and unquestioning authority. Far from having all the answers, we have barely even agreed on the proper questions.
John D C Gow is a writer based in Glasgow
