The depressing statistics that the article provides itself.
The article begins:
According to the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey, in 2003, 48 per cent of Britons worried that an increase in the Muslim population would weaken Britain’s national identity. By 2013, that had risen to 62 per cent.
A report from the Muslim Council of Britain this week may sharpen those concerns. Based on Census data, it set out how immigration and a high birth-rate have combined to swell Britain’s population to 2.7 million, around a third of them aged under 15.
Almost every political conversation about British Muslims touches on “integration,” the extent to which they and their socially conservative values fit into an increasingly liberal society. Many people fret about Muslims failing to integrate, leading separate lives in their own insular communities.
So are British Muslims becoming more concentrated in particular areas, or are they spreading out and mingling with the rest of the population? Confusingly, the answer is: both.
The rise in the Muslim population, especially because of a high birth rate, means that Muslim “clusters” are getting bigger. There are eight English council areas where Muslims make up more than 20 per cent of the population. Tower Hamlets in London tops the list with 34.5 per cent.
But at the same time, some Muslims are moving out of those clusters into more mixed areas. So while Tower Hamlets’ Muslim population grew 19 per cent over the decade to 2011, that is far slower than the UK growth of 75 per cent, or even London’s figure of 35 per cent.
“There are bigger clusters and more mixing at the same time,” according to Manchester University’s Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity. Its “index of dissimilarity” (a measure of integration) for Muslims fell from 56 per cent in 2001 to 54 per cent in 2011. Sikhs were slightly less integrated (61 per cent) and Hindus slightly more (52 per cent). The situation is improving, but only very slightly.
In my opinion it is not all about “integration,” although ideally it would be nice. Yet, even if a group does not integrate they are not necessarily a social disaster. For example, the Old Order Amish have never integrated yet no one seems particularly concerned about them.
The reasons are two: there are very few of them, so they are kind of a side show. Secondly, they are not a source of violence.
With people of different cultures, such as the Sikhs and Hindus mentioned above, expecting them to integrate 100% is equally ridiculous. It is not going to happen. Yet these groups are not causing major problems either. Part of this is because they have come from a more elite group in their own countries. The Muslims from Pakistan brought for cheap labour were at the opposite pole.
And needless to add, their religions are not toxic like Islam.