Feeling superior: Incredible racism of (some) Iranians:
Those comments opened my eyes and made me realize that racism was not just the stuff of Malcolm X and the U.S but of ours as well. I remembered my elementary school friend Mojib, also a Pakistani, and how my friendship with him was ridiculed by my older cousins. They called him my nokar seeyah or black servant. I did not like their chiding but did not have the language, as a schoolgirl, with which to interpret it as hateful, racist and arrogant.
The irony here is that Pakistanis tend to be racist against other South Asians, especially South Indians and Bengalis. Be careful of calling out the kala; unless you’re Simone Simons there’s always someone more fair.
Razib,
What are the reasons for SA preference for fair skin, is there some broader biological preference at play (IIRC you mentioned in one of your comments at Sepia Mutiny), or it is due to historical reasons.
i don’t know. the proximate/short term preference i would bet being due to muslim elites. i’ve read many of the color terms extant in modern south asia date to the muslims, though the broad outlines predate it (i lean toward the position that some of the references to skin color differences between brahmins and tribals, for example, should be taken literally).
“skin color differences between brahmins and tribals, for example, should be taken literally”
To expand on this, Sanskrit term for caste system is Varna-ashram. Uchha-varna is upper caste, Nimna-varna is lower caste.
Varna also means color. Gaura-Varna or Ujjwal-Varna would refer to white skin. Krishna-Varna is dark skin.
Having said that, the important deities in the Hindu pantheon (not necessarily Aryan/Vedic roots) Krishna, Rama, Kali etc are all dark complexioned.
regards
south asians are not the only people with a “fair skin” preference – this obsession exists in china, south east asia, middle east, north africa, south america, and even in parts of southern europe.
i noticed skin lightning creams for sale in new york and san francisco’s china town stores and in hong kong, bangkok and shanghai.
so pot calling kettle black..
iranians may be a lightly roasted variety but they are still ASI containing desi mutts.. The sooner they come to terms with it the better(for them)
“For many
Iranians believe that they
have a richer culture, a better
skin color, and are generally
superior to all Indians, Pakistanis, Afghanis, Arabs
and Africans.”
wow, this was surprsing. A clear and convenient color line. I thought even europeans were considered inferior by iranians.. did that really change or is it pandering to a modern audience?
I’ve read german tourists have to endure cringeworthy conversations about being fellow Aryan brothers with swarthy Iranian cab drives…also that its widely believed that iranians were blond/blue before those pesky Arabs..
Of course the other side of the coin is that Iranians ARE better placed than South Asians in terms of culture and history. They treat each other better, they are more literate, they have a living high culture that runs deep and quite wide within their own society. I am not much into the whole “our ancestors did this or that” shit, but most people seem fixated on it and Iranians do have more to talk about than most South Asians. It would be a bit surprising if they did NOT look down upon South Asians (or even Arabs for that matter)..almost (though not quite) as unexpected as Europeans failing to regard themselves as superior people for the last few hundred years.
I am not saying they are biologically/racially superior (whatever that means). And it may be that REAL cultural superiority is the ability to create more living representatives of that culture and keep the show going..or that “our culture” is superior precisely because we dont care about shit like shit on the streets but care about our relatives and our clan and about staying alive with less effort … But they are human beings. If South Asians were similarly placed culturally, economically, socially in comparison to Iranians, wouldnt they feel very superior indeed??
Dont shoot. I am a Punjabi nationalist and a certified Indophile. Just saying.
Dear Omar,
How can they be superior ? Just to remind you they were originally Aryans but under the influence of Yavans deviated from ritual of sacred fire as described in Vedas and starting worshipping Asuras. I know unlike us Doabis you Punjabis are polluted by Mlechchas but that much even you should know.
Not a riposte…, but I would like to know what is the Iranian high culture that spread far and wide in Iran? I assume you are talking literature and poetry, obviously, I dont know any Persian poetry, but I doubt it spread far and wide until recently, until after Iranian revolution; see http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/iran/literacy-rate
Literacy rate is 42-48% until the revolution. I wonder the idea of far-spread Iranian culture is achimera, until the time of the “Bad” iranian revolution.
Iranians are cleaner and more literate than desis (and good for them!), but what exactly makes Iranian high culture superior to South Asian high culture? Personally, I’d take north Indian classical music over Iranian music, the painting that came out of the Mughal and Rajput courts over Persian painting, the Mahabharata over the Shahnameh, and Satyajit Ray over Abbas Kiarostami.
I would take it too….but thats not how it looks to Iranians….and with greater uniformity, continuity, access and consensus about their own culture, they can more easily agree about their superiority..
+1 in that all cultures have gems of brilliance embedded within them; it just takes great minds to (re)discover them
I would say that it’s not that Persian high culture is better than SA high culture, but a much greater % of Iranians are plugged into their high culture. I mean every literate Iranian is familiar with a bit of Hafez, Sadi, on to modern poets like Sepehry, Yushij etc. Perhaps only Bengal/Bangladesh can compare to that level of mass awareness of high culture. The rest of SA is nowhere near that.
Thinking your own culture is superior isn’t racism in my book; them thinking theirs is better is no different than you thinking South Asian culture is better
Though Pakistanis try to emulate Iranians and not the other way around, so I guess that’s a chip on their shoulder
” they have a living high culture that runs deep and quite wide within their own society”
what does this mean?
what shanth said…that nearly all of them know its THEIR culture and its a pretty developed one..both aspects count.
South Asia doesnt have that common bond with their own language and their own high culture in that language.
Except Bengal? I dunno..Tamils? Malaylis? Certainly not the case in North India (maybe thats why its dirtier).
Post-Macaulay, modern India?- sure. But if we avoid the can of worms you refer to below and focus only on hindus, sanskrit was the language of the elite and educated classes, from kashmir to kanyakumari. Rudradaman, the famed Shaka/Scythian ruler of Gujarat was equally famed for his compositions in chaste sanskrit. As for Persian high culture in their own mass spoken language, farsi is not the same as classical persian or the even more ancient avestan. Yet Rumi’s poetry, the Sassanid tale of Shirin and Farhad, and the ancient Zend Avesta are all treasured.
Regarding Indian regionalism, the tamil chola empire’s military campaign to the Ganga, brought back more than just holy water, but many sanskrit texts as well. The much avowed tamil aversion to sanskrit/north india is a very recent thing driven by hypocritical politicians, who say one thing and do another. Tamil has a rich classical tradition as well (sangam literature, etc), but if we accept the pauranic indian origin story, it’s traced to sage Agastya who received the language from Lord Shiva (just don’t tell the “dravidian” parties that).
A number of other regional languages (the already mentioned-bengali, telugu, kannada, oriya/odia, etc) have their own high cultures (as distinguished from folk cultures) that are preserved both in India and in diaspora communities, but all of them ultimately look to sanskrit as the highest (the word sanskrit itself means “refined” and “cultured”). Panini’s grammar treatise (ashtadyayi), Kautilya’s work on government (arthashastra), Patanjali’s yoga sutras, Kalidasa’s myriad works in drama and poetry, Sage Bharata ‘s dance/music classic (natya shastra), the Panchatantra, even Kalhana’s history of kashmir (rajatarangini) have all India cultural currency despite being classical sanskrit works. It’s for that reason why a number of efforts have been made to revive sanskrit as Israelis have done with hebrew. But in New India, this would , of course, be considered anti-secular and communal…
Yeah, I don’t buy the whole perception is reality argument. I can understand (though not subscribe to) the phenotype hauteur ,although the popularity of rhinoplasty in tehrangeles might partially belie even this, but the high culture argument on their part is just preposterous. Pre-islamic India’s views on Persia (which doubtinggaurav facetiously hinted at) aside, Iranian history acknowledges cultural debt to India in the form of the Panchatantra, chess, and scientific contributions. The veritable library of sanskrit poetry and drama alone–leave aside classical dance and music– would put a hasty end to the argument. Persian influences on India found their engine with the delhi sultanate and mughal empire due to obvious reasons. For reactionary brahmanologicalesque saffronists like myself, who prefer kalidasa to ghalib (though even i can deign to appreciate a good shayari), it’s dirt off our shoulders.
‘”The broader and deeper” contention is a bit tenuous as well, even if accepted. It’s like saying country B with a higher median income is richer than country A with with a higher mean, higher GNI, but greater disparity. Moreover, even the poorest village pariah is familiar with the Ramayana and Mahabharata, the national epics. It is also more tenuous when the specific concept is “high” culture. And even more tenuous when one considers the cultural disruption of the last 200 years (don’t need to get into Macaulay, but let’s not kid ourselves into thinking there wasn’t an effect).
Can you clarify the being better placed in history? Is it more of a Nadir Shah thing or a not being colonized /Thousand Nations of the Persian Empire thing or a more versed in their history thing? Cause I’ll give them Nadir Shah (who technically was Turkmen, but I guess the “Mughals” balance that out), but factoring in the macedonians, seleucids, parthians, roman and byzantine invasions, huns, arabs, mongols, turks, and british hegemony, their record isn’t all saffron and rosewater either.
Speaking of which, cuisine is one area where there’s been significant influence, with some cross pollination. Beryani and kabobs betray their origin by name alone, as do, I believe, sherbet and naan. Pulao, I think might be a stretch, and the tandoor is definitely native to India so I guess we can cross out the eponymous chicken. Jalebi also went the other way. On that note, a food post might actually be an interesting diversion from the usual battle of the most parochial ethno-chauvinist…
By now I have to admit I had not thought it through and certainly didnt put it well.
I think the main thing in my mind was that Persia, Persian, Persian culture and Persian people are all pretty nicely matched in most of Iran (not talking about how and when that came about). So they get to be literate in their own language, get to engage with their own (well developed) “high culture” with some greater degree of consensus about what that is. India doesnt seem to be like that. Not even for Hindus (Muslims and their identity issues being a whole different can of worms).
and the vague thought that this is somehow connected with social spaces, cleanliness etc.
All of which may or may not be true.
As I said, not well thought out. Mostly off the cuff.
the persians and azeri turks also nicely divide the nation in terms of their historical strengths. azeris accept the superiority of persian civilian culture. persians have traditionally given azeri disproportionate administrative and military power (e.g., even khamenei is from a historically azeri family!)
What’s amusing is that white people simply don’t notice or care about the minute variations in skin colour that South Asians (and Central Asians, and Arabs), are so obsessed with. One of my professors once asked me if I’m Iranian (I’m a lot browner than your average Iranian, and I don’t have the “sharp” features that they’re so proud of.) Let’s face it, to goras we’re all just sand n*ggers.
yep. i’m pretty generically south asian brown i think, but because of my name i often get asked if i’m iranian by semi-informed ppl (razib reminds them of reza)
http://static.bloggingheads.tv/images/screenshots/bhtv-2009-02-16-gc-rk.jpg
Ehh “we’re all just sand n*ggers” doesn’t apply irl. Do you think anyone lumps Kim Kardashian or even the swarthy Steve Jobs with the Tamil dude fixing their computer? Most Americans I’ve met of Turkish, Persian, Lebanese or Syrian descent look White and are identified as such. Americans stereotype the whole region as a bunch of towel-heads, which is why Kal Penn plays terrorists on TV, but in reality let’s not pretend Vince Vaughn (Lebanese) for example is considered a sand n*gger. After my parents separated I traded my dad’s name (Mehmoor) for my mom’s last name which was Anglicized in immigration and I even notice a difference in how I’m perceived just from that.
depends on how ppl dress and what their names are. a south indian can never be white. and iranian muslim is not white. an iranian assyrian/armenian can be/is white. it is hard for a blonde blue eyed muslim to become non-white.
also, the people you specifically mention are of mixed background. many mixed brownz (e.g., norah jones) can pass as white if they are half white, so i don’t think that those examples are quite dispositive. though i agree with your overall point (the rather swarthy ralph nader was never considered a candidate of color or whatever).
“Pakistanis tend to be racist against other South Asians, especially South Indians and Bengalis”
– My experience of Pakistanis (at least the ones abroad) is that they are soft spoken, gentle and polite to the extreme. I do not think this statement is true. If it is, then they’re probably really good at hiding their prejudices or keeping it private (in which case, no one should have any problem with it).
Idk if I agree with soft-spoken, but I also haven’t noticed any racism in the Pakistani community (at least 1st gen American) toward South Indians or Bengalis. Sure Pakistanis socialize primarily with N.Indians versus S.Indians, but that’s for language reasons (Urdu/Punjabi).
It may be how deeply you know them. I dated a Pakistani, upper middle-class, well educated, investment banker in London, and he definitely felt superior to Bengalis. Though to be fair he felt superior to most people an investment wankers are wont to do.
There are so few I’m curious to know who it is now lolz!
I think she is talking about you; please check IP.
No, I did not date Zachary. I would rather not put up too much identifying information about him. And perhaps you did know him, he worked at UBS.
Persina pick-up artist Roosh V frequently refers to himself as “white.”
I doubt any desis would do so.
roosh V looks like some north indians. e.g., kashmiri pandits. i’ve met at least one kashmiri pandit who looked white (whiter than roosh) who would identify as white, because it was more honest (he had green eyes and brown hair). he indicated that a lot of white americans would just get confused with his indian name, and though he had ‘pandit features’ white people just saw his paleness and assume he was the child of hippies or something (though his name was amit or something more indian and not hippy). so he just omitted that he was the child of indian immigrants because he got sick of explaining why he was so white looking, like he was a freak.
Iran has much less poverty than south asia
yep. i have relatives who have worked as engineers in iran, and the *relative* egalitarianism is striking in contrast. i think ethnic/national pride is for losers, but i think iranians do have a lot to be proud of by many metrics.
and the relative egalitarianism is in stark contrast to other oil-rich countries such as Venezuela, Iraq, etc… How this was achieved, needs to be studied; it is as if Iranians have not let the oil get into their brains, and forced them to goof off.
well, let’s remember we’re comparing iran to brownland! so curved. but oil doesn’t magically change societies. if you take a stratified/caste segregated society, and add oil, it makes it worse. take norway, it and it makes its more norway. iran probably always had more national capital in terms of cohesion than venezuela or iraq (more specifically, it really is a nation, with a long history; the other two are recent constructs).
As a Iranian in OC I do tend to look down on the Pakistanis here. My female relatives are liberated and modern. They don’t wear hijab. They don’t have to have male chaperones to travel in public. Most of the Pakistanis that I know are as culturally retrograde Wahabis (with some notable exceptions). We integrate and thrive, they scowl and bitch about the West.
OT but is it possible for you to scratch my itch on sympathy towards the Shah and his family within the expat Iranian community? Would you say its above 5%?
I have been to Iranian-American parties in DC. The shah’s son lives right outside of DC in tony Potomac, MD. It’s more than 5% I would say. They were singing the pre-revolution Iranian anthem with a tear in their eye! Lots of diamonds on the ladies-I felt under-dressed (lol-and dark!)
Ah for the good old days when mlecchas were looked down upon. The Pashtuns call Punjabis black-legs, and so it is a pissing contest that has no relationship to actual achievement or the state of civilization.
Going by the Indian American actors appear in American TV sitcoms and the roles that they play, South Asian browns here may have broken through the color barrier towards joining Jews and the Irish in making it. The rate at which South Asian browns intermarry with whites or light-skinned Hispanics (Maria Theresa Kumar is a lovely example) but rarely Blacks or dark-skinned Hispanics means that they are consciously or subconsciously selecting for lightening their offspring. Curiously, the panorama of color among Brahmins and high castes in India may indicate that whiteness was not necessarily sexually selected by them – or perhaps there is an evolutionary advantage (skin cancer for example) that allows dark skin to persist.
Comparing Iran with India on any metric is problematic. For starters, its population is comparable to that of Indian states such as Madhya Pradesh or Tamil Nadu. Therefore, any metric used to define the entire Iranian population or parts thereof will yield equal or larger populations when applied to India. These metrics could be penetration of high culture (however, that is quantified): if 50% of the Iranian population is reasonably familiar with certain products of Iranian high culture (number perhaps established by a well-constructed survey), then India would certainly have many more individuals (definitely more than 50% of the Iranian population, ~ 38 mln) who would be equally familiar with products of Indian high culture. The same could be true for some esthetically preferred phenotype like skin tone. For instance, if the Iranian population is defined by a certain skin tone (perhaps measured by the median value of upper inner arm reflectance for the population, a measure that has been used to quantify skin tone), then my guess is that an Indian subpopulation of at least 75 mln with the same median value of inner arm reflectance could be defined rather easily. My point being that any comparison between India and Iran is simply overwhelmed by the issue of differences in scale. In contrast with Iran, the biological and cultural diversity of India simply cannot be captured by the descriptor ‘Indian’. Even regional diversity cannot be captured by terms such as ‘Bengali’. I have certainly encountered ‘Bengalis’ (they tend to be brahmins) who could ‘pass’ for being Iranian (perhaps of the slightly swarthier variety). So, what we are left with are just semi-accurate or inaccurate perceptions, of the self and of others. On the one hand, we have the Hafez and Saadi-quoting, sharp-featured, nearly white skinned Iranian ( a poor unfortunate European stranded in the middle of Asia) and, on the other, the culturally colonized, snub-nosed, greasy haired, dark brown Indian (Australoid aborigine with a veneer of culture imported or imposed from points north and west) – stereotypes that are useful if one is not really interested in learning more deeply about oneself or anyone else.
Pingback: Casteocracy Alert: North Indian (Punjabi Sindhi) High castes pose as Chennai Beauties? | Brown Pundits
Pingback: Indians: inherently unhygienic? Indian writer touches third rail | Brown Pundits