My comments have been voided with no rationale given for doing so beyond the dislike of a criticism over the copy pasting of articles.
If this page is going to be moderated in such a manner then I withdraw all my original content and do not wish to engage anymore.
At some point I was told that this site was aimed to focus on high quality content and this is what attracted me here in the first place. It now seems to have devolved into regurgitating articles scoured from the press focused on muslim victimhood in India.
I doubt this subject is of all consuming interest to most current readers of this site, but this is the current predicament. All the best.
I have written a new post on this. Authors please don’t void each other comments (or moderate them, as that is my job to moderate Authors).
However also please be courteous to one another, use your own post to complain or even email me.
I can make my posts sticky fwiw and I can also do that highly engaged articles. I think original posts will be sticky so that way BP originals don’t get lost in the fray?
I gave you an explanation. Your complaining about what I posted wasn’t adding anything to the discussion. You more than made your point (essentially making the same complaint multiple times).
We’ve established that you don’t like my politics. That’s your right. But instead of needlessly complaining about that you can post things on your own threads that reflect your own politics.
You are free to moderate your threads however you like and I am free to moderate my threads however I like.
My objections are 2 fold.
1. Repeated copy pasting of unoriginal articles from across the internet only ruins this page here. Those people already have a platform and their voices are heard. I want to hear from the quieter voices, the ones who do not have a career doing so.
2. Flooding the zone with a particular view point. It is productive to hear from disparate views as it enables and fosters understanding. Repeated posts of the same nature creates a slant and bias which unless countered with equal enthusiasm or ferocity leads to imbalance. The net result is the complete collapse of quality. As the posts are not even original I don’t see how one can even argue for the continuation of this practice.
X.T.M, unfortunately you cannot sit on the wall for this, as the admin you need to decide what you want for this space.
The only compromise I can suggest that you are free to post whatever you want on your threads and I am free to post whatever I want on mine. Your objections as to “quality” are only your opinion and are not binding on anyone else.
Your objections to the politics of what I post are neither here nor there. Clearly, you want right-wing Indian views (Islamophobic ones included) to be platformed and reject “The Wire” and “Scroll” because they represent secularist views. Again that is your right but you can only respond by posting right-wing views under your own threads not by attempting to police my threads.
Ultimately, this is not your blog (neither is it mine) and therefore you are no one to try to censor me. However, you are free to ignore my posts and I am free to ignore yours.
Don’t try to police me as that is not your right. Stay in your lane.
Really what you are advocating for here is a spam posting free for all where everyone loses but some sort of idiotic parity is maintained.
Let me suggest an alternative, feel completely free to post as many articles you like to the comment sections.
Keep the main blog limited to strictly original content, book reviews ok, no article reviews. That way it retains it’s original character while leaving the comments as the free for all jamboree they should be.
No censoring due to view disagreements, have the courage to argue your positions.
“Spam” is subjective.
Bottom line is I am an author here (as you are) and I have the right to post whatever I like to my own threads. I do not report to you and you are no one to tell me what to do. You are free to ignore what doesn’t interest you. However, if you needlessly complain on my threads without adding anything substantive then I will delete your comments.
Ultimately, XTM is the final authority. If he wants me to stop posting things from “The Wire” he can say so. There is absolutely no reason for me to do what you tell me to.
I do think as a courtesy Authors should not void each other’s comments?
I would not generally but the endless complaining was getting very repetitive.
I am a bit tied up today as it’s a special weekend. Let me get back with my thoughts .
Question for anyone who may know: has Razib left this website completely?
On the topic of this post, my 2 cents (without knowing the history) is that xperia2015 cannot be telling Kabir what he can or cannot post (or link to), and Kabir cannot be blocking comments from xperia2015 (or anyone else) unless those comments are disrespectful, ad hominem ,etc.
(This may or may not be relevant: I recall sparring with Kabir (assuming he is the same person) under the “Numinous” moniker several years ago (2016-18 IIRC) about the usual India-Pakistan topics. There was little I agreed with him on, but he seemed sincere in his beliefs and ready to engage with critics, though he’d get defensive about, say, Jinnah and Mohammad, among other things. Let free speech rules apply IMHO.)
I believe Razib has left this website completely. BP is now run by XTM (or Zack as you may know him)
Thanks for your input. For me, the fundamental principle is that I have the right to post whatever I want under my own threads. Xperia has the right to post what he wants under his own threads. As for blocking comments, I believe that the principle on BP used to be that individual authors were free to moderate their threads the way they see fit. I generally don’t believe in blocking comments but in this case there was repetitive complaining about my choice of articles. This wasn’t adding anything to the conversation so I warned xperia that further comments of that nature would be deleted.
As should be clear by now, I’m not a person who is easily bullied.
Lastly, I find it deeply ironic that xperia is protesting against censorship when this whole dispute began with him asking for me to be censored.
Razib is the ultimate owner of this site.
Let me second that opinion of Pandit Btown.
I do not mind Kabirs opinions, even though dont agree often. In general they do not push any buttons, Kabir is entitled to his opinion.
Anyway Kabir is reasonable and is decent human being and respectful of others. I would be more “aggressive” with annoying comments.
Thanks for the vote of confidence sbarrkum!
I don’t mind people disagreeing with me as long as they disagree politely.
Speaking of being “aggressive” with annoying comments, I think we all remember Razib’s attitude 🙂
Thanks Pandit Brown.
I do remember engaging with you back then. We did disagree on many things but I remember that you were one of the commenters on BP who was consistently anti Hindutva.
Yup 🙂 Still am.
I initially accepted your comment in good faith but had to void it due to an ungracious remark directed at me. Let’s keep the discussion focused and respectful.
More censorship! Atleast spare threads of other writers!
XTM: I appreciate the hard work you put in.
Kabir spends a lot of time commenting here. My basic expectation from him is that at least when something reasonable is said the other party acknowledges it. When he writes posts others listen and learn. But he keeps peeing in the pool on India related matters, its like talking to a chatbot that keeps spewing misinformation.
Posting as backup response to Kabir:
‘The point remains that India followed different rules in different cases. In my opinion (and in Pakistani opinion generally) that is hypocrisy. You are free to disagree. The ruler decided in Kashmir, a plebiscite was conducted in Junagadh and a “police action” was conducted in Hyderabad. There was no consistency.’
I just explained the reason of changed attitude and yet here we are again. Yes we did as we pleased, should we respond to 1947, 1965, and 1999 by sending raiders into PoK? or parliament attack? or Mumbai 1993 and 2008 in the spirit of consistency wrt Pakistani behavior. You would want us to act stupid so that Pakistan can do to us what it did to Ashraf Ghani.
‘Balochistan is a province of Pakistan. Not a Disputed Territory. Secession is not acceptable.’
‘The Durand Line is a settled border. Just because Afghanistan refuses to accept it , it doesn’t mean it’s up for discussion.’
This is what I am talking about.
Again and again you keep repeating biased positions. It only makes us realize that you are simply unreasonable and …
I explained why India started taking different positions on matters related to accession after Jinnah needled Patel by accepting Junagarh’s accession knowing full well that it was not contiguous, Hindu majority and held Somnath!
Yet you keep repeating some version of what you were saying earlier as if no explanation was ever given. This is being close minded.
Patel offered entire Kashmir, Nehru in offered to draw line in Handwara inside the valley proper, Swaran Singh offered entire Kishanganga valley that is atleast 100’s of sqare kms of territory. Pakistan spat on all these proposals for peace and will one day lose atleast some of what it currently occupies.
‘Just as Nagaland is not Pakistan’s issue.’
You don’t understand India’s troubles in Nagaland. What is this nonsense to bring it up here?
More number of people have died due to insurgency in KPK than in Kashmir and Nagaland put together.
‘Balochistan is not a disputed territory.’
It was a Nepal and Bhutan like state that Pakistan swallowed up! 2X maybe even 3X if adding feudatories of the size of Sri Lanka on the mouth of Hormuz.
It’s accession is disputed. Three rounds of indigenous insurgencies starting from 1960s.
I agree that Balochistan is not a dispute between countries unlike Kashmir. But is it’s accession a settled matter? No!
>its like talking to a chatbot that keeps spewing misinformation.
This +1.
I understand that we want the space to encourage and share a multiplicity of views. However, abuse of ‘author’ privilege by repeatedly spamming propaganda, one-eyed comment discourse, not to mention cherry-picked comment deletion, threats to “void all comments regardless of content” when the bias is challenged. I mean, this is not the way to conduct a community conversation.
You can say what you want but you must say it respectfully.
You are no one to “explain” anything to me. Don’t condescend to me.
And now you childishly block me from commenting on the ‘partition’ thread.
This is….beyond ridiculous.
If commenters are blocked at the whim of an explicitly biased commentator, that spells doom for a community space.
I restored your comment.
Voiding is not the same as deleting; I don’t like deletion unless it is extreme circumstances. Voiding is acceptable but also remember to save your comment and post it on another thread. I won’t interfere what Kabir does on his thread (but won’t allow deletions as I want the commentariat to grow).
I am blocked from responding to Kabir’s slanted perspective on the partition thread.
This is petty, and honestly, I am not enjoying being caught up in this nonsense. My intent for being on here, is to interact with a wide range of perspectives, and yes that includes even ones that I strongly disagree with, like Kabir’s.
But when one person is abusing/misusing the privileges they have, it almost feels necessary to get in the mud and argue back, just so that the one-sided bullying can’t ‘get away with it’.
It really is quite abominable. Ideally this should be a friendly place which is tolerant and mutually respectful at the very least if actual bonhomie is too far a stretch.
Instead the tone has just ended up hostile and combative.
This not only has the effect of driving away the more moderate readership/commentators but also forcing everyone to have their backs up all the time.
“Forcing everyone to have their backs up”– Don’t disrespect me and I won’t disrespect you.
Your comments towards me reek of personal animus. At this point, I would rather not engage with you.
At this point, I’ve started to have this fervent desire to see you apply a rule to yourself that you demand of others.
R u blocked?
I closed the comments.
“Kabir’s slanted perspective”– Argue your own perspective instead of constantly criticizing mine.
I’ve repeatedly stated to you I don’t like your tone. Don’t disrespect me.
You literally just said you won’t comment on my threads and asked me not to comment on yours. That was your previous comment before this one.
The one before that was how no one should dictate to you.
As I said. At this point it is just tiresome…
Look, I don’t want to fight with you. It’s honestly tiresome at this point.
If you are going to constantly disrespect me it’s better we disengage.
If your alternative is that you can bully me out of BP, that’s not going to happen. I don’t take kindly to bullies. Never have and never will.
https://www.brownpundits.com/2025/07/05/a-note-of-protest/#comment-114239
Kabir, you are technically on Indosaurus’s thread btw
Backup post
We are not from South Asia. We are from Indian subcontinent. Bharat, India, Hindustan is the name of this land like Europe or Arab peninsula. This terminology is erasure. Indians do not accept it.
ML was not the representative of Indian Muslims. Unionists, Red Shirts used to win. ML was a party of feudal foreign stooges that swore loyalty to English crown. Congress’s socialist stance and jailing of it’s leaders gave opportunity to the divisive politics of Jinnah. ML kept losing election until THE election for which they vitiated the communal environment of the country.
In Sindh, ML got Allah Bux Soomro murdered, In Punjab, ML initiated riots in Rawalpindi that set the ball rolling, in NWFP, ML imprisoned Gaffar Khan. In Bengal, Jinnah called for Direct Action Day, and the bloodshed of partition.
For 11 out of 27 years from 1920-1947 Muslims were president of INC. And yet Kabir does his regular thing by addressing them as representative of the interests of Hindus.
“However, I do believe that the creation of Pakistan was in the end a net positive since it allowed a substantial segment of the Muslims of British India to exercise our own destiny in a sovereign state.”
Not much I can say to this without being disrespectful.
Yes I hate this terminology – “South Asia”. In all instances it can be happily replaced with Indian subcontinent or Indian for short while talking about the culture rather than the politics.
This is again one of those horrible instances where an accommodative majority gives in to an unaccommodating minority without fully realizing the damage they do to themselves.
yes South Asia is a dumb term.. Hindustan is a lot better since we know where it starts and ends.
Hindu Kush to Indian Ocean..
tbh I have not idea what the Eastern border of the Indosphere is. I suspect it includes a lot of “IndoChina”
There’s a good piece to be written on the Indonesian – Philippine island chain. It’s also where Hinduism(+Buddhism) meets Islam and Christianity.
Here christianity is the eraser of the past. Names, gods, culture, almost language. Islam arrives by trade and is far less revisionist than when it shows up in India with the sword.
I wonder what is the best term for this region, IndoChina is just too colonial and SE Asia is accurate but brings up my gag reflex at seeing South Asia.
ASEAN I suppose.
Transdharmic Asia
“South Asia” is not a term used to replace India. This is paranoia on the part of people who “hate” this terminology. It’s a term created by the US State Department and widely used in Area Studies. It’s not a term created by Pakistanis.
Secondly, “South Asia” is not restricted to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh. SAARC includes Afghanistan.
South Asia also includes Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka. I suspect sbarrkum would not take kindly to suggestions that Sri Lanka was a part of India.
I use the term that is appropriate for the context. If I want to talk specifically about British India, I will use British India. If I want to speak about the region as a whole I use “South Asia”.
If you’re not offended by terms like “Southeast Asia” or “West Asia” than “South Asia” should not be any different.
No one says it is a term to replace India. This is however the Indian subcontinent and that includes Sri-Lanka, Nepal and everyone else.
This was the terminology of my childhood and I’m going to stick with it.
Calling it South Asia is akin to Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico.
That said, I have as much desire to impose my will upon a MAGA supporter as I do upon you.
Do you begin to grasp at how illiberal you sound with all the censoring and offence taking and insisting on terminology that suits you.
I’ll admit to having taken some pleasure at pointing out your hypocrisy in the past but now it is just tiresome. The repetition of it has a ‘going through the motions’ feel.
You literally wrote “In all instances it can happily be replaced by Indian for short”. I’m pointing out to you that it cannot. Sri Lanka is part of South Asia (that’s one example). Please do ask Sbarrkum whether he’s OK with being referred to as an Indian. He will give you a piece of his mind (probably fairly colorfully).
“Insisting on terminology that suits you”– I’m not insisting on anything. I’m free to use the term “South Asia”. Don’t use it if you don’t want to.
I personally have no issues with the term “Indian subcontinent”. Though I will point out that Afghanistan is considered part of South Asia. Afghanistan is not geographically part of the Indian subcontinent. Actually technically half of Pakistan is on the Iranian Plateau and not the Indian subcontinent.
I hope you’re not going to argue that neutral geographical terms are somehow a conspiracy to hurt Indian nationalists.
I thought you were the self professed english expert. The inanity of misquoting a line which is on the same page brings you to a level I have been hitherto unfamiliar with.
That’s exactly what you wrote. If you now want to walk it back that’s a different matter.
Don’t question my reading comprehension. I’m the one with a degree in English Literature.
I don’t want to belabor this endlessly.
Quite clearly it is not. The institution that handed out your degree seems to have been a bit lax on checking your comprehension. Either that, or you have had some regression later in life. Regardless, the english is very plain, if you cannot understand it, the fault is not mine. Maybe get an AI to explain it to you like a mentally deficient 5 year old.
Your meaning was quite clear. It’s fine. Attempt to walk it back now.
You are now descending into the realm of personal insult. I’m not going to play that game with you. Not today.
Going forward, don’t comment on my threads. I won’t comment on yours. I don’t like you and you clearly don’t like me.
How is it conceivable that I walk back anything when I have 3 comments repeating that the line is self explanatory and you should try to understand it better.
I mean really, you should have gone in for a course in logic rather than english. It might have helped more.
I understand the implication very clearly. Bottom line is South Asia doesn’t equal India.
Calm down.
You are free to use whatever terms you want. However, you are not free to tell me what terms I can or cannot use.
“This terminology is erasure. Indians do not accept it”– There are over a billion Indians. Don’t presume to speak for all of them. Many Indians are fine with the term “South Asia”.
I am Pakistani-American. I am a South Asian. Since I’m not an Indian citizen, I cannot accurately describe myself as “Indian”.
Sri Lankans, Bangladeshis, Nepalis etc are South Asian. The term “Indian” doesn’t apply to them.
It is paranoia on your part to be so viscerally offended at what is really a neutral term.
“And yet Kabir does his regular thing….”– It was Quaid-e-Azam’s position that INC really represented Hindu interests rather than the interests of all Indians (as they claimed). I could have made that clearer in my piece.
I’m not going to defend Direct Action Day.
I am entitled to my opinion on whether the creation of Pakistan was a good thing. What I stated is the mainstream view in Pakistan. We are happy that we have a nation-state of our own. Many Indians (particularly on the Hindu Right) are also happy that Pakistan (and Bangladesh) exist because it means there are less Muslims within the Republic of India’s boundaries. 14% of Indians are Muslim. If British India had not been divided 1/3 of Indians would have been Muslim.
Basically, you are entitled to your opinion. But you can’t impose your opinion on me.
(Also I voided this comment on my thread because I personally find your tone extremely hateful. I really have no issues with your right to say what you want but I’m not going to stand for disrespect).
X.T.M: I sent your post “Let Hindus Decide for India” to one of my friends (Indian Hindu of Bengali origin). His response was to ask me why I write for a blog that is pro-Hindutva.
He’s neither a Muslim nor a Pakistani so maybe take this as neutral feedback.
the magic of BP is that it is perceived as the other by everyone..
With due respect, I’m the only Pakistani Muslim here. I’m also the only one advocating for Nehruvian secularism.
My friend was so disgusted by your post that he wouldn’t even comment on it. So clearly you turn off left-leaning Indians.
If you’re OK with that that’s cool.
I told him I write because I appreciate you giving me the space to do so and because temperamentally I refuse to be bullied or driven out.
Manav is left-leaning and he just posted?
Yes! That was a nice surprise.
you can ask your friend to write for us..
I did. He refused to write for a pro-Hindutva forum.
That’s a tad harsh
That’s his POV. He’s an Indian living in India and I guess he has to deal with a lot of Hindutva types and doesn’t want to subject himself to more.
Btw, did my friend Manav Kapur ever write to you? He said he sent an email to brownpundits19.
I’ll check it now
no email from him
But that is the correct email?
I’d say you’re pretty much unbiased and as objective a liberal as I’ve seen 🙂
Thank you – though I don’t know if I am a “liberal per se.”
I like to be wrong; to be able to to grow in my priors.
That’s a true liberal, opinions should change based on convincing facts.
I try..