xenophobia and the myth of the ‘other’: a focus on ... · 1 / xenophobia and the myth of the...

XENOPHOBIA AND THE MYTH OF THE ‘OTHER’: A

FOCUS ON ISLAMOPHOBIA

July 2020

www.cmpr.org.uk

OUR MISSION

The Centre for Muslim Policy Research is the only independent think tank in Britain that researchesthe state of the Muslim community in the UK. Our research aims to provide a better understanding ofwho British Muslims are and the issues most affecting them.

By bringing together academic research, policy development and community expertise to engage withpolicy-makers, we intend to help them develop their own thinking about some of the most importantand challenging issues facing Muslim communities today.

What do we do

• Publish evidence-based research, policy briefings and seminal papers, grounded in academic rigour,to facilitate understanding and dialogue in the public sphere

• Engage with policy-makers to enhance their understanding of the most critical issues that affectBritain’s Muslim community

• Respond to government consultations, papers and policy proposals

• Conduct surveys and opinion polls to monitor and comment on Muslim opinion on pertinent issuesand map Muslim policy concerns

“To redefine the public dialogue relating to Britain’s Muslim community”

Impact of COVID-19 on the Muslim Community: A Rapid Review July 2020

1 / Xenophobia And The Myth Of The ‘Other’: A Focus On Islamophobia

Contents

Our Research Team 2

Executive Summary 3

Methodology 4

Xenophobia And The Myth Of ‘The Other’ 4

Islamophobia And Anti-Muslim Sentiments Throughout The Ages 5

Myth Of The Clash Of Civilisations And The Dichotomy Between Islam And West 6

Recommendations 9

Bibliography 10


Our Research Team

Nadir Mohammad Founding Director and Chief Editor Nadir is responsible for setting CMPR’s strategic direction. He is currently a Management Consultant for a Big4 firm specialising in strategy and operations for Government clients in the UK and the Middle East. Having read theology at the University of Manchester alongside undertaking traditional Islamic studies, Nadir’s academic research interests are relating to contemporary issues affecting British Muslims as well as Islamic movements in South Asia emerging from the colonial context. He is currently a postgraduate researcher at the University of Birmingham in the field of Theology & Religion

Sidra Iftikhar Lead Contributing Writer Sidra holds a Bachelor of Arts in Religion & Theology and a Master of Arts (with distinction) in Humanitarianism and Conflict Response from the University of Manchester. Her academic interests include migration, culture, religion, conflict, humanitarianism, development, psychosocial support and mixed forms of visual and creative media and expression.


Executive Summary Xenophobic attitudes towards ‘the other’ are mythical, archetypal concepts that are repeated throughout history

and illustrate a common underlying core - of the act of the human need to scapegoat others. The myth of the other

- an individual shadow figure, who is alien to ‘our’ society - is embedded within the historical parameters of human

society since the primitive epoch; and one of its global victims in the present day is Islam and the ‘Muslim’ society,

which is being manifested through ‘Islamophobia’.

Some key recommendations and points of consideration are:

• The adoption of a single unified definition of Islamophobia by public and private sector entities to build a

common understanding of its causes and consequences as well as to express solidarity with Muslim

communities. The best definition developed to date is by The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on

British Muslims in its report titled “Islamophobia Defined: the inquiry into a working definition of

Islamophobia” (dated 27th November 2018) following two years of consultation. Although the definition

may not be perfect, it is the best definition available that can be quickly adopted by all as a key step to

tackling Islamophobia in our communities.

• Diversifying the curriculum in schools to reflect and represent histories and lived experiences of minorities

in the UK. This includes that of Muslim and other diverse religious communities, intertwined with histories

of Black and Minority ethnic communities in the UK.

To do this would create more awareness and understanding of difference (cultural, ethnic and religious)

from a young age.

• Provide incentives to private sector entities to undertake training programmes for educating company

leadership and employees on xenophobia, discrimination & prejudice as well as structural inequalities. The

purpose of such training programmes would encourage mindfulness of subconscious prejudices that hinder

positive hiring practices of employers and efforts for social mobility as well as the everyday behaviour of

employees.

• Conduct a review on media coverage relating to religious groups and ethnic minorities. The outcomes of

the review should inform action needed to tackle ‘scapegoating’ and unfair negative portrayal of some

groups that encourages scare-mongering and phobias relating to specific demographic groups.

• Conduct a review of current UK regulation of social media platforms to tackle their slow response, and at

times inaction, on the promotion of Islamophobic as well as other discriminatory content on their platforms.


Report

/ Methodology

This report seek to explore ‘the other’ through Jungian archetypes of the trickster/shadow figure, the idea that all

myths in society have a common underlying core (Levi Strauss) and Edward Said’s understanding of orientalism and

idea of the hierarchical relationship between the orient and occident. Consequently, due to this perceived common

core, all societies need this ‘other’ figure from which they can gain an understanding of what they themselves are in

comparison. This report will look at medieval and orientalist/imperialist societies and how these societies have

needed a scapegoat (Girard, 2001: Online) / group that they could identify as shadows or tricksters who are the very

opposite to themselves. It will specifically focus on how the ‘Muslim other’ has been seen throughout these periods.

Through this analysis, this report tries to demonstrate how Islamophobic attitudes towards Muslims are not a new

phenomenon in modern society, culminating directly after 9/11; but are instead, replications of ‘the other’ - which

have, throughout history, taken the many different forms of racism, anti-Semitism, apartheid and other modes of

injustice that humans have projected onto those individuals whom they perceive to be different. Whilst

Islamophobia has a presence in many countries, this report will mainly focus on Britain and will give examples of

anti-Muslim sentiments and attitudes enacted by various groups such as the English Defence League (EDL) along

with various politicians and how in turn this has created various counter currents amongst European Muslims

themselves.

/ Xenophobia And The Myth Of ‘The Other’

‘Xenophobia’, as stated by the Oxford English Dictionary, is an ‘intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from

other countries’, foreigners or those from a different culture. The other, a foreign and alien individual/group in

society - is a mythic component of the collective conscious and unconscious mind of humanity which been present

at many points throughout history. This ‘other’ has been the ‘scapegoat’ onto whom society has projected and

transferred ‘the community’s regressions’ (Girard, 2001: online). The other also morphs into and becomes ‘the

trickster’, an archetypal ‘collective shadow figure, a summation of all the inferior traits of character in individuals’

(Jung, 2003:174). This myth of the trickster as stated by Jung (2003) along with the scapegoat (Girard, 2001:online)

like many myths, have both been preserved and developed in the modern age, existing since antiquity; and both

have a ‘therapeutic effect upon individuals’ (Jung, 2003:174). This is due to the fact that through this shadow figure,

various societies and groups have intended to project upon ‘the other’, as previously stated, the ills of society, which

their collective or individual self/ ego does not wish to be associated with. This shadow figure then becomes ‘a sort

of second personality, of a puerile and inferior character’ (Jung, 2003:168); dehumanised, inferior and the carrier of

all the violence, guilt aggression – a sacrificial mechanism which in turn provides human communities (who subjugate

the other), with a sense of their collective identity and unites them in the process (Kearney, 1995:1).


Whilst recognition of differences between oneself and another individual or group is a natural and normal tendency

of human beings, which is not entirely negative; it is when a group or individual society actively seeks to differentiate

and demonise other human beings, placing themselves on a hierarchical scale that is above the other. This process

of dividing, defining and ‘other-ing’ has existed throughout history and has taken many forms from; the demonising

of women as witches and temptresses in the medieval age, based upon the warped idea of Eve; and also anti-Semitic

depictions of Jewish figures and the Moor in medieval society and literature, such as Shylock and Othello and in the

works of Shakespeare, etc. The fear of the other has been a common theme in British society in the modern epoch,

in which Jews, Black people, the Irish community and Commonwealth immigrants have been victims who have been

scapegoated, and in the present-day people from Polish, Romanian and Bulgarian origins have become a target;

illustrating that whilst race/racial difference is a common factor- it is not the only basis upon which prejudices are

formed. During the 1960s and 70's these communities - (the Jews were mainly targeted at the turn of the twentieth

century), tended to be seen as below English standards ‘both in physique and in moral and social customs’ (Krausz,

1971: 56). They were said to be dirty, a burden on taxes, spreading the community with disease and criminality, and

creating unemployment amongst English workers (Krausz, 1971: 56). There was also a great fear that these

communities, especially the Jews, Commonwealth immigrants, and Black people might ‘change the character of

[inner] central city areas’, especially places like the east of London (Krausz, 1971:56). These archetypal falsities about

‘alien’ communities along with the discrimination, and negative attitudes directed towards them - are ironically

repeated in exactly the same way today, across time and in many societies and even subgroups; illustrating the

common structural core between the human psyche, and the various myths it creates (Strauss cited in Cohen,

1969:346). The people who constitute the object of representation, and those who are created as the other, change

over time in light of various historical, political, international and social circumstances and interests; illustrating the

‘multidimensional’, ‘dynamic and heterogeneous’ (Miles, 1989:40) nature of racism and xenophobia.

/ Islamophobia And Anti-Muslim Sentiments Throughout The Ages

At present, the ‘quest to scapegoat specific groups is ever inventive’ as one group constituted as the victim of

xenophobia, easily morphs into the next; and old ‘others’ or ‘aliens’ are resurrected, as the archetypal scapegoat re-

emerges from the fathomless pit (Fekete: 2009, 14). There has been a general shift from a focus of colour in the

1950s, to race in the 1960s, ethnicity in the 1980s and finally religion in current society, which has now emerged as

a ‘major social signifier’ used to target ‘the other’ (Abbas, 2007: 289, cited in Massey & Talta, 2011:162). British

media, as stated by Massey and Talta (2009: 162) have tended to depict issues of race and immigration as a perceived

threat, and one of the first memorable instances in which Muslims were portrayed as violent fundamentalists in

Britain before 9/11, was during the book burning in Bradford of Rushdie’s ‘satanic verses’. The term ‘Islamophobia’

was coined ‘as an analogy to Xenophobia’ in the Runnymede Commission on Anti-Semitism in 1997, and was defined

as a ‘shorthand way of referring to dread or hatred of Islam – and, by extension, to fear or dislike of all or most

Muslims” (Cited in Allen, 2007:149). Despite the existence of anti-Muslim sentiments since the medieval period,


after the 9/11 bombings on the world trade centre and the ‘war on terror’ declared by Bush; the radicalised ‘Muslim’

other has become the pre-eminent folk-devil of our time (Morgan & Poynting, 2011:1). Since this period, Muslims

have globally become victims of Islamophobic prejudice and stereotypes through the coverage of negative

stereotypes in the mass media, verbal abuse on the streets and vandalisation of mosques etc, all of which have

become normalised activities (Sajid, 2005:2). Islam is seen by many, as a ‘fundamentalist religion of the book’, with

its own laws and social conducts – stuck in the middle ages, untouched by time or place, and forever waging a jihad

against unbelievers’ (Sivanandan, 2009: ix). But it is not merely fear and dread of Islam and Muslims face. ‘Muslims’,

a worldwide religious group differing greatly in their ethnicities, beliefs, cultures and histories; are labelled as one

homogenous, unchanging entity - whose whole life is revolved around a set of supposed violent, and extremely

primitive laws - expounded in the presumed ‘essentialist’ and static religion of Islam. In addition to this Islam, and

its followers as a result are stereotypically caricatured, by mass media and newspapers, etc as being anti-western;

against democracy; practisers of a religion thought to stone women, cut throats and beat wives and promote and

glorify terrorism (Dagistanli & Grewal, 2011: 136). Whilst there are some Muslim extremists as there exist in many

religions and cultures - to label an entire group as constituting a single collective entity, which is largely portrayed

negatively, is dehumanising. It strips them of all individuality and makes it easier for governments and society, in

general, to deal with them as a whole projecting onto them, the repeated archetypal ills of society, and in the process

hiding its own larger problems, behind a masked veneer. It is evident that whilst there was once a Jewish question,

there now seems to be a Muslim question plaguing society’s mind.

/ Myth Of The Clash Of Civilisations And The Dichotomy Between

Islam And West

Interestingly, if the term ‘Muslims’ is typed into Google, some of the first images that appear in the search results,

are those of aggressive and violent Muslims as seen in the image below.

Whilst it is normal and acceptable for religions to receive criticism in the modern epoch; there has been a great

vilification of Islam and its followers, and a depiction of Muslims as being not only alien, but also morally and

intellectually below the rest of modern humanity due to their presumed backward religious beliefs. This

representation thus implies a sense of cultural hegemony, as in comparison with criticisms of other religions such as

Hinduism and Christianity; the violent nature attributed to Islam and therefore, Muslims, is one that is largely

negative and seems to be an extension of the colonialist understanding of Islam and the orient (Chauhan, 2005:29).

During the medieval period, and in the context of the crusades, Islam - through the prism of Christianity - was seen

and depicted as a barbaric, heathen religion posing a threat to Christianity and its values (Miles, 1989:16). These

depictions of Islam from the crusades and medieval period are not adequate alone to explain anti-Muslim

sentiments; however, they greatly influenced the ideas of the orient/ east and Muslims for imperialists from Britain

and France during European expansion in the sixteenth to nineteenth century (Ernst, 2004:17-18). These medieval


views of religion, along with the emergence of pseudo-scientific ideas of social Darwinism, phrenology and the

doctrine/myth of race, helped create - in the mind of the European occident /imperialist- a preconceived and

imagined idea of the other, the orient of the east (Said, 1978:3; Ernst, 2004:20). By creating a body of theory about

the orient - India, the Middle East and North Africa - ideas of its aberrant mentality, backwardness, and therefore

need for ‘civilising’; the orient became easy to control, invade and conquer (Said, 1978:205; Miles:1989- 18,29).

Subsequently, by creating this definition of ‘the other’, European culture and the occident also helped create for

itself, a sense of superiority, identity, and strength in comparison to the orient, who was a ‘sort of surrogate and

even an underground self’(Said, 1978:3), again going back to the need of shadow figure mentioned in the previous

section. In this context, the Muslim population in these regions also helped to mark the spatial and conscious

boundary of Europe and ‘the other’ (Miles, 1987:18) creating a dichotomy or conceived split between the two which

continues to remain in the minds of many today.

These oriental ideas, as previously stated have helped play a huge role in creating stereotypes and preconceptions

about Islam, as being the antithesis of and posing a threat to ‘western’ values, democracy and secular, liberal society.

It is evident that today, ‘the long-discredited chimeras of archaic man [and the desire to blame one group as being

the sole locus of society’s problem] have returned dramatically to the foreground’ and continue to have an influence

on society (Campbell, 2008: 219). Today, the British government and politicians such as David Cameron - along with

various ‘nationalist’ groups such as the English Defence League - draw upon the Muslim community, who are

perceived to be and depicted as an anomaly, an ‘other’ in British society due to their foreign religion; which is

believed to be ‘inimical to mono-cultural, multi-faith Europe’ (Fekete, 2009:41). These Muslims may be European

born citizens of the state, yet their adherence to Islam is believed to threaten western security and the very notion

of democracy and libertarian values of Britishness itself; and they are thus seen as seen as shadow figures who are

a ‘corrosive influence’, spreading terrorism, refusing to integrate and undermining national values’ (Morgan &

Ponyting, 2011:2). It is quite interesting to highlight the similarities between the ideas expressed in Samuel

Huntington’s polemicist thesis of the ‘clash of civilisations’, which also draws upon the apparent ‘uniqueness of

western culture’, its maturity and universality which is now open to invasion by ‘barbarian invaders’ i.e. Muslims

(Huntington, 1997 303-18). Whilst it is evident that Muslim radicalism or extremism most definitely does exist in

Britain, as can be seen through the 7/7 bombings and various extremist Muslim groups such as ‘Muslims against

crusades’’ and ‘Islam4uk’, the threat is at times exaggerated - especially in the now global media and internet - and

a huge sense of ‘moral panic’ is created (Bonn, 2011:84).

The threat of this supposed clash of civilisations and cultures is used and repeated by many groups such as the EDL;

a nationalist right-wing group that greatly believes that the West and Islam are incompatible and therefore, sees

itself as opposing the spread and supposed rising threat of ‘militant Islam’ and the desire of radical Muslims to spread

Sharia law (Mackie, 2010: Online). In effect, by drawing this ‘other’ group, and highlighting its barbaric and

backwards beliefs, the EDL creates for itself its own identity or role of a hero or saviour figure in comparison and


appeals to fears of the other that already exist in people’s minds and helps to form a collective identity of like-

minded individuals. However, by creating a repeated narrative of discrimination of Muslims as terrorists/ extremists,

a re-definition, or self-fulfilling prophecy has emerged on the other side; whereby Muslims who perceive themselves

as marginalised in British society - by foreign policy and continuous scapegoating - are or could be ‘drawn into

constructing their identity accordingly’ (Chauhan, 2005: 26-7). An example of this can be seen as previously stated,

in the banned extremist group led by Anjem Choudhary named ‘Muslims against crusades’, a group that is known

for burning poppies in the 2010 homecoming parade of the national regiment- which could most definitely create a

sense of fear of a changing society and the Muslim other in the minds of many.

It is evident that radicalism exists, therefore, on both sides of the spectrum, however, the creation of the Muslim

trickster/shadow figure, is itself is the major threat which attacks the liberal democratic and multicultural state and

calls into question its ability to manage ‘globalisation, immigration and cultural difference’ (Morgan & Poynting,

2011:1). Whilst Gilroy (2000) refers to anti-essentialism in regards to the elimination of fixed ideas surrounding of

the myth of race, it can also be applied to culture, civilisations and religious groups such as Muslims and Jews, in that

there is no such thing as a fixed and unchanging core identity that is a part of a group. By creating ideas of the ridged

and fixed separation between cultures, civilisations and individuals, ‘other-ing’ - as seen in Islamophobic attitudes,

denies the fluidity, diversity and crossing of cultures that is present amongst Muslims in Britain, who are in fact

creating for themselves a new European Islam. Islamophobia, therefore, like many of the previously mentioned

accounts of Jews, Commonwealth immigrants is not a new phenomenon in society that has emerged solely after

9/11 and the emergence of a supposed terrorist invasion. It is, in fact, a repeated mythic concept of ‘the other’, a

need for humans and various societies to create a scapegoat, which helps them to identify themselves in comparison.


/ Recommendations

Islamophobia is an intersectional phenomenon and issue that cannot be separated from racism. As such, to address

and reduce Islamophobia, there is an urgent need to address structural racism and discrimination in the UK that

others and marginalises certain groups of society.

Some key recommendations and points of consideration are:

• The adoption of a single unified definition of Islamophobia by public and private sector entities to build a

common understanding of its causes and consequences as well as to express solidarity with Muslim

communities. The best definition developed to date is by The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on

British Muslims in its report titled “Islamophobia Defined: the inquiry into a working definition of

Islamophobia” (dated 27th November 2018) following two years of consultation. Although the definition

may not be perfect, it is the best definition available that can be quickly adopted by all as a key step to

tackling Islamophobia in our communities.

• Diversifying the curriculum in schools to reflect and represent histories and lived experiences of minorities

in the UK. This includes that of Muslim and other diverse religious communities, intertwined with histories

of Black and Minority ethnic communities in the UK.

To do this would create more awareness and understanding of difference (cultural, ethnic and religious)

from a young age.

• Provide incentives to private sector entities to undertake training programmes for educating company

leadership and employees on xenophobia, discrimination & prejudice as well as structural inequalities. The

purpose of such training programmes would encourage mindfulness of subconscious prejudices that hinder

positive hiring practices of employers and efforts for social mobility as well as the everyday behaviour of

employees.

• Conduct a review on media coverage relating to religious groups and ethnic minorities. The outcomes of

the review should inform action needed to tackle ‘scapegoating’ and unfair negative portrayal of some

groups that encourages scare-mongering and phobias relating to specific demographic groups.

• Conduct a review of current UK regulation of social media platforms to tackle their slow response, and at

times inaction, on the promotion of Islamophobic as well as other discriminatory content on their platforms.


/ Bibliography

• Allen, Chris, (2007). ‘Islamophobia and its consequences’ in (eds.), Samir Amghar, Amel Boubekeur,

Michael Emerson, European Islam: Challenges for Public Policy and Society (Brussels: Centre for

European Policy Studies), pp. 144-167, Chapter 9

• Bonn, Scott A.,(2011). ‘The Social Construction of Iraqi Folk Devils: Post-9/11 Framing by the G.W. Bush

Administration and US News Media’ in (Eds.), Morgan, G. and Poynting, S., Global Islamophobia.

(Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Pub).,pp. 83-101 Chapter 5

• Mackie, Phil (2010) ., English Defence League Demos Feed Islamic Extremism BBC

• http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11787839- (last accessed 14/1/2013)

• Campbell, Joseph. (2008).The hero with a thousand faces. (Novato, Calif.: New World Library).

• Chauhan, Eugenio, (2005). ‘An East- West Dichotomy: Islamophobia’ in Hilel schenker and ziad abu

zayyad (eds.), Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, a Palestine Israel journal book (Markus Wiener Publishers,

Princeton), pp.25-33

• Cohen, Percy, (1969). Theories of Myth Man, New Series, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 337-353 Royal Anthropological

Institute of Great Britain and Ireland

• Dagistanli, Selda and Grewal,Kiran . (2011). ‘Perverse Muslim Masculinities in Contemporary Orientalist

Discourse: The Vagaries of Muslim Immigration in the West’ in (eds.) Morgan, G. and Poynting, S. Global

Islamophobia. (Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Pub)., pp. 119-143 Chapter 7

• Ernst, Carl W., (2004). Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh U.P).

• Fekete, Liz. (2009). A Suitable Enemy. (London: Pluto).

• Gilroy, P.(2000). Against Race. (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.)

• Girard, R. (2001). I See Satan Fall Like Lightning. (Maryknoll, N.Y : Orbis) Chapter 12 “Scapegoat” pp. 154-

60 http://girardianlectionary.net/res/iss_12-scapegoat.htm (Last accessed 6/1/2014)

• Jung, C. G. (2003) Four archetypes. (London: Routledge).

• Huntington, Samuel P., (1997) The Clash Of Civilisations and The Making of a New World Order.

(London:Simon and Shuster).

• Kearney, Richard (1995) “Myths and Scapegoats: The Case of René Girard”, Theory Culture Society 12: 1, pp.

1-14

• Krausz, E. (1971) Ethnic minorities in Britain. (London: MacGibbon and Kee).

• Massey, Joanne and Tatla, Rajinder Singh, (2011) “Moral Panic and Media Representation: The Bradford

Riot” in (Eds.), Morgan, G. and Poynting, S., Global Islamophobia. (Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Pub),161-181

• Miles, Robert. (1989). Racism. (London: Routledge)

• Morgan, G. and Poynting, S. (2011) Global Islamophobia. (Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Pub)., Introduction

http://girardianlectionary.net/res/iss_12-scapegoat.htm


• Oxford dictionary: Xenophobia

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/xenophobia?q=xenophobia last accessed 2/1/2014

• Said, Edward (1978) Orientalism (Britain: Routledge & Keagen Ltd.)

• Sajid, Abduljalil,(2005). ‘Islamophobia A new word for an old fear’ in Hilel schenker and ziad abu zayyad

(eds.), Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, a Palestine Israel journal book (Markus Wiener Publishers,

Princeton), pp.1-13

• Sivanandan, A. (2009). Foreword, in Fekete, Liz. A suitable enemy. (London: Pluto). pp.viii-1

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/xenophobia?q=xenophobia

Funding

The Centre for Muslim Policy Research’s initiatives and projects are intended to be self-funded and through the generous support of private individual donations and trust grants.

We have received no external funding to date. To ensure the Centre is financiallysustainable, it is important that we can raise funds to support staff we employ to conductresearch.

Our research is impartial and financially independent. This means that we are free to writewhat we wish, how we wish, and without fear or favour. The Centre will refuse to acceptfunding from any potential donor if it infringes our principle of independence.

Policy-makers are right to empower and fund civil society to carry out research work thatsupports them in their policy making. Therefore, we are not opposed in principle to receivingpublic funds, as long as our independence is not compromised.

If you value our work, please support by donating to us through our website:www.cmpr.org.uk/donate.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Muslim Community: A Rapid Review July 2020

Copyright 2020 © Centre for Muslim Policy Research. All Rights Reserved.The Centre for Muslim Policy Research is a not-for-profit organisation registered as a Private Company Limited by Guarantee (Company Number: 12675360) in England and Wales.

xenophobia and the myth of the ‘other’: a focus on ... · 1 / xenophobia and the myth of the...

Documents