Trustees resisted an Islamophobia commission as a radical break from the colour-based race paradigm.

Evidence

It took almost two years to begin implementing this recommendation. There was difficulty in agreeing who should be approached to chair the proposed commission on Islamophobia and how to choose its members. Some of the trustees were concerned about such a radical departure from the prevailing race relations paradigm enshrined in the 1976 Act, and had unhappy memories of how CARD (the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination) had fragmented and collapsed in the 1960s. — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 729

Categorization

• XREF: Documents the pre-history of the later racialization turn: even founding the Commission meant departing from the colour-race paradigm encoded in the 1976 Race Relations Act. — connects to: Mainstream race-equality bodies resisted framing Islamophobia as a racial issue — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 753; Anti-racist orgs once treated religion as a separate axis from race. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 89; The commission’s Islamophobia work left the race relations paradigm untouched — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 754 (+2 more)

Related

• The Runnymede Trust’s founding paradigm was colour-based race relations, not religion. (similarity 0.89)
• The commission’s Islamophobia work left the race relations paradigm untouched (similarity 0.88)
• Anti-racist organizations historically avoided treating religion as within their remit (similarity 0.88)
• Anti-racist orgs once treated religion as a separate axis from race. (similarity 0.87)
• Two decades of advocacy left the dominant race relations paradigm untouched (similarity 0.87)
• Mainstream race-equality bodies resisted framing Islamophobia as a racial issue (similarity 0.86)
• Muslim groups embraced the report while race-equality institutions ignored it (similarity 0.86)
• Mainstream race-equality groups narrowed Islamophobia to mere religious discrimination (similarity 0.84)
• The Runnymede Trust acknowledged Islamophobia as racism in 1994 (similarity 0.83)
• British anti-racism discourse centred on colour until the early 1990s (similarity 0.83)
• Separating Islamophobia as ideology from racism undermines anti-racist struggle (similarity 0.81)
• The commission avoided internal Muslim community conflicts and their public-duty implications (similarity 0.81)
• The Islamophobia Commission’s interfaith framing silently excluded non-mainstream Muslim voices (similarity 0.80)
• Islamophobia is best understood and countered as a form of anti-Muslim racism. (similarity 0.79)
• Anti-Muslim discrimination should be fought through existing anti-racism frameworks (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Mainstream race-equality bodies resisted framing Islamophobia as a racial issue #corroborates (0.95) — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 753
• The commission’s Islamophobia work left the race relations paradigm untouched #complicates (0.85) — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 754
• Anti-racist organizations historically avoided treating religion as within their remit #corroborates (0.85) — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 84
• Anti-racist orgs once treated religion as a separate axis from race. #expands (0.80) — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 89
• Separating Islamophobia as ideology from racism undermines anti-racist struggle #expands (0.75) — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 159