Blog Management (or lack of it, on my part)

This blog was created by Razib Khan and I joined it shortly afterwards. It has gone through some changes over time. For a period, I was the only “administrator” active on it, but I have not been devoting much time to it recently. As a result the blog had become rather inactive, but recently one of our early “founders” (XTM) has come back and taken a more active role in the blog and has revived activity on it.

Unfortunately, there were some clashes between authors and commentators recently and I am afraid that such has been my lack of attention that I have not even read most of the posts in question. So I think it is time to face the facts and admit that I am not going to be able to take a more active role and should therefore withdraw from responsibilities I am not able to fulfil. I hope to remain an author here and I hope to do more podcasts as well. Razib and whoever he designates/invites/allows will continue to run the blog and I wish them the best. I hope it remains a place where diverse voices from the Indian subcontinent can continue to debate the issues that are important for people of Indian origin (and people in general) all over the world.

I hope the authors I brought on will continue to write and comment as well.

How many fires are there, how many suns?

How many dawns? How many waters?

I ask this, O fathers, not to challenge.

O Sages, I ask it to know

(RigVeda Book 10, hymn 88)

AI vs Poet (Open Thread)

A University of Pittsburgh study presented participants with poems by ten renowned English-language poets—including Chaucer, Shakespeare, Whitman, Dickinson, and Plath—alongside AI-generated poems in their style using ChatGPT 3.5. Interestingly, AI poems were rated higher in overall quality than the human-written ones, contrary to previous findings.

I am perplexed about how we can assess an AI-generated poem as inferior to a human’s. As when we read a poem, we read it for its content, irrespective of anything else. The emotional valence of Iqbal’s Shikwa has nothing to do with his circumstances; whether he were a general in the British army or a debauched drunk, the poem would still be there to be read, cherished, and savoured. Extending this logic, how can AI-written poems be rated lower simply because they were not written by a human? I don’t know.

Anyone who wants to explain their take on this.

Why Brown Pundits Needs a Spine, Not a Consensus

As Brown Pundits returns to a steadier rhythm, I want to clarify a few things that have come up during the recent arguments, walkouts, and personal attacks. The charge that the blog “leans” one way or another has become common: some say it is too Saffron, others say it is anti-Indian. This is predictable. It is also wrong.

My decisions as Admin have never been based on political alignment. They come from something deeper:

the civilizational context of the speaker.

There is a difference between criticism that comes from within a tradition, and criticism that comes from outside it. A Dharmic voice attacking India or Hindu society is part of an internal quarrel; a family fight inside a civilizational frame. I treat that as internal dissent, even when I disagree with most of it.

A critique that comes from an Abrahamic frame reads very differently. I know that worldview well. I know its instincts, its myths of moral supremacy, its rhetorical tricks, and its hostility to plural traditions. So I scrutinize it more closely.

That is not bias. That is context.

This also explains why some people were frustrated about moderation choices. But the real problem was simpler: for several months, the editors were not doing their job. Delegation failed. Moderation failed. Oversight failed. This strained the entire comment ecosystem and created the conditions for an outrage cycle.

The recent Sri Lanka post is a perfect example of what the blog should highlight. It captured the psychological cost of a civil war that most South Asians ignore. It cut through nationalist posturing and forced readers to confront a real tragedy. That is the purpose of this space. BP is not only a place for endless India–Pakistan sparring. Those fights bring traffic, but they do not deepen understanding.

The blow-up around caste revealed the same problem. The people who claim caste “does not matter” often reveal how central it is to their worldview. When the conversation touched anything sensitive, the same voices who lecture others on “free speech” vanished into a hartal. The moment you discuss caste honestly, you become their enemy.

That was the real trigger; not any one commenter.

The worst part of this episode was the personal abuse I received. One email in particular was dehumanizing in a way that should be unacceptable anywhere, let alone here. The fact that it came from someone inducted onto the blog without proper vetting only made it worse. I was disappointed that this happened at all, and I have made it clear that it will not happen again. Going forward, I alone will approve new authors, aside from Razib, who I see as an ultimate authority. No exceptions.

This is not about ego, control, or insecurity. I am at peace with who I am, what I have built, and where I stand.

This is about responsibility. The person who carries the daily load of the site must also have control over who participates in shaping it. Authority without accountability is chaos; accountability without authority is impossible.

Brown Pundits works only when people argue honestly, write fearlessly, and disagree without turning each other into caricatures. We will get things wrong. We will over-moderate or under-moderate. But the only thing worse than imperfection is paralysis.

Silence is death for a blog. Engagement, messy, uneven, contentious, is life.

BP is alive again. Let’s keep it that way.

The Weight of Memory: A Sri Lankan Reminder

By Sbarrkum

Every country carries its wounds, but some of us carry them in our bodies. I rarely speak about Sri Lanka’s civil war on this blog, because most of us have learned, painfully, to move on. But sometimes a comment or a casual reference to the LTTE pulls open a door that many of us have spent decades trying to close gently.

For me, this is not rhetoric. It is family history.

Two of my cousins were killed in the late 1980s; one by the LTTE, the other by the Army. Two more relatives were tortured. During the worst years, mobs came to burn down our home because they suspected we were Tamil. My mother stood outside, spoke to them calmly in Sinhalese, and convinced them to leave. That is how close violence came to us; literally to our doorstep.

I myself was arrested twice on suspicion of being an LTTE operative. I spent two days in police remand and was beaten with a belt. Friends who happened to witness the arrest intervened and contacted someone who could get me out. Had I remained until Monday, I would have been taken before a judge and sent to the notorious Boosa Prison. Many never returned from there.

I also lost people I cared about deeply. My late partner’s parents were among the sixty villagers killed in a single LTTE attack. In the area where I live, nearly every family lost someone; a brother, a father, a cousin, a neighbour.

Most Sri Lankans have made their peace with the past. We have had to. The country could not function otherwise. But when the conflict is invoked lightly or abstractly, without awareness of the cost paid by ordinary people, it reminds me how easily those of us outside the centre of global conversation are forgotten.

This is not a demand for silence. It is simply a reminder:

For many of us, this history is not theoretical. It is personal, lived, and unbearably real.

Meltdown Bhāṣya: Verse 1.1.1 (Part 1.3)

The philosophy of Land and the idea of God: The Cathedral of physicalism, A protestant materialism

Originally Published: February 03, 2025

Part 1.2

The philosophy of Land and the idea of God

The nirīśvaravādi ādi-accelerationists no doubt consider our usage of the word ‘God’ and countless references to ancient myths and texts a serious breach of the philosophy and a perversion of its ideas. Though we are not interested in soothing their fears, the objections they will raise must nevertheless be wrestled with, as Landian Accelerationism portrays itself a purely materialist philosophical system, which, although not often talked about at present, is properly referred to as ‘libidinal materialism’. Thus, we must descend into the ‘sublime basement’ of Land’s philosophy before we may return once more to the heady poetics of Meltdown. His system of thought is most comprehensively laid out in the opus The Thirst for Annihilation (Land, 1992b), which makes it clear that his philosophy follows in the wake of the Nietzschean ‘death of God’, something he explicitly states when he assembles a theoretical machine linking Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Freud, and, most importantly, Bataille to himself. As Mackay and Brassier put it in the ‘Editors’ Introduction’ of Fanged Noumena (Land, 2012): “Land allied himself to a line of renegade thinkers – Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Bataille – who mocked and disparaged academicism and wielded philosophy as an implement for exacerbating enigma, disrupting orthodoxy, and transforming existence” (p. 2-3). Continue reading Meltdown Bhāṣya: Verse 1.1.1 (Part 1.3)

Clearing the Augean Stables

I removed a few disruptive authors from the BP roster recently, primarily because some interactions had crossed into personal abuse. That’s not something I’m willing to absorb or normalise.

What continues to surprise me is how quickly discussions become ideological flashpoints, even when my own approach has consistently been one of congeniality and openness.

That said, the overall atmosphere on the blog already feels lighter and more functional with fewer volatile personalities in the mix. It’s a reminder that BP only works when the space is manageable and not dominated by ego or hostility.

Also to the current Commentariat; stick to the facts, not inflammation please. So reflect on whether your comment is adding more light or heat beforehand.

Bollywood calling Pakistan. Again.

So a new trailer for a hindi acshun phillum dropped recently, and its another one of those that throws around the ‘based on true events’ tag for additional street cred. This time around though, there’s a bit of a twist. The plot apparently centers around the Lyari Gang wars in Karachi, with some additional fictional tempering of course.


Unsurprisingly, this will elicit a whole gamut of reactions from either side of the Radcliffe line, especially due west. The preview is unusually long, and somewhat unsurprisingly filled with shocking violence – the recent success of movies like Kill and Animal were bound to result in a race to ever-increasingly levels of ‘ketchup’ and fireworks. But apart from that, at least to me, didn’t seem very novel or interesting. I am mildly curious about the world building that the movie manages to pull off.

Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Netflix series Heeramandi is another example of this phenomenon. Where the Indian movie industry is accused of ‘cultural appropriation’ and telling a story that is “Pakistani, and not Indian”. With that one, as much as I am… unimpressed with Bhansali’s output – I view him more as a choreographer, less of a filmmaker, one who is far more successful at spectacle, not so much with cinema – I still think that the stories of the subcontinent should be accessible to all. Lahore after all, especially pre-partition Lahore is as much a legacy of Ganga Ram as it is of the Mughal Empire, or the Sikh, for that matter.

This time around however, the setting isn’t historical or pre-partition. Is there an argument to be made that this is “cultural appropriation”?

For me, more than anything, its yet another missed opportunity. In an alternate timeline, a movie like this would have been a golden opportunity for Pakistani actors to get visibility on a much larger Indian stage, and the quality of the output could have been immeasurably raised with behind-the-scenes contributions – production design, location and language expertise, to name a few.

Somewhere down the line, if things finally start reverting to ‘normal’, perhaps future projects like these will incorporate Pakistani participation and be better for it.



Racism Is Wrong. So Is Calling People Sub-Human.

It is wrong to dehumanise anyone. One of the recurring issues on BP is this histrionic insistence that individuals “own” the truth. The truth is broad, multi-layered, and something we all approach imperfectly. No single person has a monopoly on it.

I obviously reject racism in every form; that should go without saying. But I also find it nonsensical to claim that it is a moral imperative to call a racist “sub-human.” That is a classic moral slippery slope. Once you begin dehumanising others, even for views you find repugnant, you simply replicate the logic you oppose.

What I’ve noticed recently is that people are increasingly confusing ego with ideology. That never ends well. This is a blog. Nothing here is existential. We should be able to disagree fiercely without crossing into territory that strips others of their humanity.

I am back

I am now going to manage the blog more actively.

Everyone please behave. I have restored all deleted comments (I haven’t read them).

I’ve also realised that the Commentariat are actually manifestly ungrateful.

I expect everyone to adhere to civility; if I don’t like the tone of a comment, I will simply trash it. This is a no-nonsense policy that applies to ALL.

Also to all authors, contributors and editors please make sure you are above board; don’t descend into the pettiness.

An internal note I sent earlier to all authors/contributors/editors: Continue reading I am back

Brown Pundits