I have often noticed something distinctive that Brown pundits—especially Pakistani Muslim commentators—bring to the table.
I will highlight two or three comments from previous posts that shed light on an important aspect often missing from Indian discourse.
One comment by Kabir from about 25 days ago stated:
“Muslims tend to be more intransigent vis-à-vis conversion of a spouse.” Sharia is very clear on this point. A Muslim man may marry a Christian or Jewish woman without her converting. A Muslim woman, however, cannot marry a non‑Muslim man; there are no exceptions for women. Of course, Kareena Kapoor married Saif Ali Khan without converting to Islam, but that was not a nikaah. Under Islamic law, they are not considered married—though I doubt either of them is concerned about that.
Another important comment by Kabir was:
“Hinduism, by definition, is actually very offensive to Islam. Idol worship is probably one of the worst sins a Muslim can commit. Obviously, Hindus are entitled to believe what they want—I have no issue with that. But a fundamental reason why Muslims find Hinduism distasteful is because it is not monotheistic.”
I did not find either of these comments offensive (some Hindus may have done so). On the contrary, they reflect a candid and honest analysis on Kabir’s part and are quite instructive. Such observations are largely absent from Indian liberal discourse because Indian liberals—secular, Hindu, and Muslim alike—tend to shy away from confronting the uncomfortable mismatch between Hindu and Islamic worldviews. This is fundamentally a clash of outlooks. The inability to address it honestly creates more problems today than necessary.
Looking at Pew data on attitudes toward inter‑religious marriage, Hindus and Muslims appear to be similarly conservative, with a very high proportion in both communities opposing interfaith marriages. However, in the outlier 1–2% of cases where such marriages do occur, Muslims often insist on conversion, whereas Hindus—who may oppose such marriages nearly as vehemently—generally do not insist on conversion.
This asymmetry echoes a point XTM makes in his post on Hinduphobia. Despite over a thousand years of interaction between Hindus and Muslims on the subcontinent, cases of genuine synthesis—though often celebrated—remain outliers.
Another example of asymmetry: while it is true that there is considerable distrust of Muslims among Hindus today (one may call this bigotry or something else), outright disrespect for Islamic traditions or for the Islamic Prophet is very rare among Hindus. Even staunch Hindutvavadis (though this may have shifted somewhat in recent years) have traditionally maintained that their issues are with Indian Muslims, not with Islam or the Prophet.
As a result, when controversies such as the cartoons issue or The Satanic Verses arise, many Hindus—even those who harbor some prejudice toward Muslims—tend to support the Muslim position on blasphemy. Owing to their worldview, Hindus generally regard holy prophets with a largely positive outlook (and this is even more pronounced in the case of Jesus).
The converse, however, is less common. It is quite frequent to encounter ordinary Muslims—who may or may not be personally bigoted—being openly disrespectful toward Hindu deities. This is not surprising when viewed in light of core Islamic attitudes toward idol worship.
The Amazon Prime series Paatal Lok once depicted a Hindu police officer refraining from offering prasad to his Muslim colleague, while the Muslim colleague extended a helping hand. In my own corporate experience, I have often seen the reverse: a Hindu offering prasad from their ancestral deity—sometimes following a pilgrimage they had dreamt of for decades—European and American Christian colleagues making extra efforts during such exchanges due to cultural conditioning, and Muslim colleagues politely refusing the prasad. Such interactions can fuel long‑lasting resentments.
There may be other sources of friction as well, possibly from the other side. For instance, Muslims and Christians might feel uncomfortable walking through streets filled with Hindu deities during festivals—or perhaps most do not.
However, if these issues are to be addressed in public discourse, there must be an honest acknowledgment of this asymmetry. This is not merely a clash of civilizations, but a clash of outlooks. As some commentators have noted, even American Christians are now encountering Hindu deities more visibly with the growth of Hinduism in the United States.
I do not claim to know if and how—these issues should be resolved. But one thing is clear to me: if this space helps surface these uncomfortable truths honestly, it is doing something worthwhile.
Infact if X or reddit posts are anything to go by, RW Hindus openly mock Islamic figures and many of these trolls are part of BJP IT Cell. While I have not seen anything even even remotely close to mocking Hindu religious dieties by Muslims.
Generally Hindus ‘usually’ do not disrepect Islamic religious figures, however it’s a wrong assumption that Muslims disrespect Hindu religious dieties just because they condemn the concept ‘idol worship’.
It is pretty explicitly stated in the Quran, Suran Al An’am: ”And do not insult those they invoke besides God”. You would not generally see Muslims scholars or even laypeople disrespect Hindu dieties and if they do they are clearly transgressing.
People need to understand that being against polytheism as a concept does mean it provides a license to Muslims to mock and abuse other religions.
Saying anything anonymously on Reddit and X and other online forums is not comparable to saying these things in person – in public.
If you want havent found their counterparts – you just havent been looking;
You see both sides on fire in YT comments – no trouble
But you wouldnt get those comments from the old school Rwers – RSS types.
Look up Akbaruddin Owaisi’s speeches and the applause he gets;
There are some more examples – one just needs to see.
No RW Hindu politician has done anything close to that – and if anyone had any ambitions – the Nupur Sharma fiasco made it clear.
//No RW Hindu politician has done anything close to that – and if anyone had any ambitions – the Nupur Sharma fiasco made it clear.//
Look up T Raja Singh, or even Himanta Biswa Sarma. There are many local level people, who also get raucous applause that a single Akbaruddin gets once in a while.
They get applause for anti Muslim statements or plain bigotry – what i m pointing is specific disrespect of prophet akin to disrespect to Hindu deities.
Can you point to any such thing ? with evidence please
When did Akbarruddin disrepct any hindu deity? Or for that matter any muslim politician in India.
Akbaruddin openly mocked Ganesh – even making funny gestures about elephant head, lakshmi, durga, hanuman, even about hindu cremation. Not just one time but multiple times.
His famous 15 mins are enough to finish of hindus is in different category – hate speech not religious blasmephy
I dont know why blasphemy is somehow worse than open calls of violence, whether the politician is whatever religion.
Ok, touche, at least openly insulting of the prophet is not accepted, no doubt because of the backlash it can get in middle east countries, not because of any genuine respect. In private, they probably dont like the prophet.
Just to give you an anecdote:
On this very blog under its previous iterations, we had people repeatedly calling the Prophet of God a “pedophile” because of his marriage to Hazrat Ayesha.
This is obviously Islamophobia 101. So yes a lot of Hindus reflexively hate Islam.
When I pointed out that Draupadi was married to five brothers at the same time (which in today’s context would be considered incest) I got yelled at.
So the antipathy is mutual.
Razib has called on this very site the Prophet Muhammad a pedophile — apparently marrying a post pubescent woman is still considered ‘pedophilia’ in modern standards that are ever changing, despite that being common practise in every society since forever.
I remember this one BJP fan online mocking the Prophet Muhammad for his 11 wives and how he only married for sex. I simply asked him how many wives does he think Krishn had and that really offended him for some reason that he blocked me.
Honestly a normal Muslim would not even know how many wives Krishna had or who is Krishna, outside India, and few Indian Muslims like Hasrat Mohani were Krishn bhakts.
The anti Muslim discourse promoted by BJP IT cell and whatsapp university has really opened a pandora’s box of Muslim hate.
I think mocking Islamic figures and practises is not something Hindus will ever win in, so they should highly discourage this practise.
I think you have a point – the online discourse is one thing; but thats mostly BJP IT cell – not RSS walaas – who themselves are increasingly becoming targets of new Hindu Right for being soft or Islamophilic.
Krishna did not
1) Forced marriage
2) Did not Talaaq them
3) Did not insist on halala
4) Did not marry a son’s wife
…I could go on
You need to have some benchmarks to compare. Otherwise such specious and incompatible drivel is expected. These are the typical talking points from Muslims
this is quickly degenerating into hate speech; we will allow Gaurav to moderate this thread but we will intervene if the Cresceniate find your comments offensive..
Truth is not hate speech. Don’t hide behind moral grandstanding.
You have El Khwaaja spouting provocative debunked lies about Indian army rapes in Kashmir – projection probably from the Pakistani army’s despicable conduct in Bangladesh – and this happens.
Not a projection. This is the ugly reality of the Indian military. They’ve committed genocide in Kashmir and yes they also were largely responsible for the genocide and rapes of Muhajirs in East Pakistan (present-day Bangladesh) which goes under the radar and ignored by the mainstream and liberal academics. The Indian military has committed similar war crimes in Sri Lanka and if I go by what I’ve Sikhs in America have told me, they’ve done the same in East Punjab.
These comments are Islamophobia 101. It’s definitely hate speech.
Were any of those comments made by Hindus on this blog ?
I have been active and i only remember Razib and maybe XTM making those comments.
Yes, those comments were made by Hindus.
Insulting the Prophet of God is a go-to move of Hindutvadis.
To clarify, Draupadi did not marry her own brothers. What Draupadi did is called Polyandry. It is the feminist version of masculine polygamy. In today’s context marriage with own brothers or close cousins is considered incest/inbreeding.
I didn’t say Draupadi married her own brothers. She was married to five brothers at the same time. This is incestuous in the modern context.
In Islam, you cannot sleep with your brother-in-law. That is incestuous. You can marry your brother-in-law once your marriage to your husband ends (either through divorce or death).
As an aside, it has been argued by many that the Pandavas being five different persons was a literary device used by Ved Vyasa because the Mahabharata is so old and primarily an oral tradition that it would have been difficult to convey internal conflict through long monologues.
At least Draupadi and the Pandavas were adults and of marriagebale age,the really villains in that instance is Kunti and Yudhistar who use their authority to ‘make’ the Pandavas ‘share’ Draupadi.
With Nakul, Sahadev and Bheem and ultimate Arjuna, eventually acquiensing.
I will admit I’m not familiar with the finer details of the Mahabharata. I’ve never been all that interested in Hindu mythology. I have read a modern retelling of The Ramayana which honestly didn’t make all that much of an impression on me.
I’m only aware that Draupadi was married to five brothers at once. This is clearly incestuous and–to modern sensibilities– quite gross.
This was my counter to when the Prophet of God was called a “pedo” on this forum.
Technically, Hazrat Ayesha was past puberty and thus of “marriageable age”. While our modern sensibilities do frown on people being married under the age of 18, it is important to note that this is in many ways a cultural construction.
In Romeo and Juliet, Juliet is 13 and she is about to be married off. So this was normal in Europe in the 1500s.
My own maternal grandmother was married when she was 15. My grandfather was in his 30s. This was in 1946 or 1947.
This is clearly incestuous and–to modern sensibilities– quite gross.
Of course, halala is absolutely kosher by modern sensibilites.
And you just keep doubling down on your Islamophobia.
Only to be expected at this point.
//Technically, Hazrat Ayesha was past puberty and thus of “marriageable age”. While our modern sensibilities do frown on people being married under the age of 18, it is important to note that this is in many ways a cultural construction.//
I dont want to get into this, but wasn’t she a toddler when she was married and still a toddler when her marriage was consummated, I could be wrong as I have not really engaged with this particular critque.
I think Draupadi marrying 5 brothers is quite gross only to sensibilities that either look down on polyamory as a concept( like christianity) or islam where I was surpirsed to know that marrying blood siblings was prohibited.
Hazrat Ayesha was most definitely not a toddler when she was married.
Here is Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha
I was taught that she was an adolescent at the time of consummation since Islamic law generally uses menarche as the point at which a girl becomes an adult.
As for Draupadi: In Islam, a woman cannot have more than one husband at a time. This is necessary in order to be certain who the father of any child is. This is also why we have the concept of iddat. Generally, three menstrual cycles must pass after a divorce or husband’s death before the woman is free to marry again. This is again to make sure that the paternity of any possible child is absolutely certain.
You can marry your spouse’s sibling but only after either divorce or the death of the spouse. This is otherwise considered incest. A Muslim man cannot be married to two sisters at the same time.
You cannot consummate a marriage with a child in Islam – therefore pedophiia is prohibited and punishable.
Puberty was the defining line between childhood and adulthood in every premodern society and this is what defines an adult in Islamic law as well.
Ayesha’s age at the time of marriage could be anywhere between 9 and 17 but what was not debated was that she was post-pubescent.
So all claims of ‘pedophilia’ are completely wrong. The word pedophile always meant having sex with a pre pubescent child even if modern society is now changing it to a particular age (16, 18, 20, I’m now even hearing 25 in some radfem groups) these numbers keep changing.
that speaks to your own colonised mindset.
“English literature” is simply a post-colonial construct designed to overawe the ex-colonies.
We are all allowed our own tastes and preferences.
Of course I’m Westernized. I grew up in the West. My parents went to convent schools in Pakistan. Even my paternal grandfather had a Master’s Degree in English Literature. That’s the kind of family I come from.
But at the same time my paternal grandmother had Ghalib and Mir memorized.
I am not stating one is worst than another.
In my worldview i would police calls to violence and not blasphemy.
Backlash in the middle east countries in the globalised world is new thing.
The point i am making is slightly different – I wonder if you are reading thoroughly or just making your point irrespective.
Point i am making is that hardcore RSSites have rarely insulted prophet because they themselves do not dislike the prophet but though they may have disliked Muslims.
No moral value judgement here – one is better or worse.
The RSSites dont insult the prophet because of global backlash not some respect, and why will they dislike muslims a community separated from them by religious belief and not dislike the religious beleifs.
Some muslims have not got the memo that openly insulting hindu deities is a no-go because they may not personally see any consequences that cant be dealt with but that does not mean, other muslims may not have nasty views( though I would say majority of muslims are neutral to hindu beleifs) and same way if the gulf monarchies suddenly stop policing insult of the prophet or we reduce our dependencies or they become dependent on us, we would see a lot of open insults of the prophet.
Most RSS leaders are too old to understand global backlash and social media. If it truly hated Muslims, it would not have a wing dedicated to Muslim wing. Its fundamental ideology is that all Indians are cultural Hindus and that you can pray to anyone in the manner you like, you should only treat this country as the object of your loyalty. Perhaps read a bit?
Wow! A defense of the RSS.
You just keep proving how right-wing you are.
The RSS itslef does not police its own affiliates or even BJP leaders who routinely make anti muslim remarks, and even indulge in anti muslim violence. Not even a word of censure.
Akbaruddin somehow gets a license and others should not retort?
Do it as many times as he does, akbaruddins speeches seem to be split by years, people like T rajas speeches by months
The difference is you cannot find an equivalent to monkey balance this
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/udhayanidhi-stalin-sanatana-dharma-eradicated-row-bjp-vanathi-srinivasan-11483947
Yet to see Hindu legislators talk about eradicating Islam and Christianity from the country.
Giving bountys to eradicate christian priests, and even justifying social boycott against christian is eradicating christianity.
‘Rs 3 lakh to Rs 11 lakh’: Protest in Mumbai after BJP MLA offers bounty on priests; demands suspension | Mumbai News – Times of India
Karnataka BJP Leader Booked Over Calls for Mass Murder of Muslims – Clarion India
Calling mass killings of a people who follow a religon is no different from calling to eradicate.
And there are many more instances like this where everything from social boycott to discrimination to mass killings are promoted.
I am also humble enough to accept that Sanathanam, has a different connotation and meaning, in Tamil Nadu rather than impose my own understanding.
‘Tamil Nadu People More Hindu Than North Indians’: Karti Chidambaram Rejects ‘Anti‑Sanatan’ Charge | Politics News – News18
Maybe Udayandhi should use tamil equivalents of manuvad, or other terms to get the point across but this kind of ambiguity is not present in the speeches of many other BJP leaders.
What udaynidhi is saying is dog whistling for brahmins at best and “brahmanism” at worse. And it’s not like an Owaisi or T Raja, it’s the potentially future CM of TN.
The kind of anti Brahmin rhetoric that’s normalised in TN and Dravidian movement would belittle a lot of Anti Muslim rhetoric you see by RW nutters.
This has been going on for 70 years. It took a Christian Movie star getting a brahmin into TN cabinet. Even JJ had no Brahmin ministers.
Most RW nutters, like Owasis brothers and the others I bring up, openly call for violence on humans following a religion, the DMK for all its faults is not advocating violence on Brahmins, nor calling for their social boycott or even going out of its way to reduce their presence in education, business or the civil services within Tamil nadu itself. Yes maybe DMK should give seats to brahmins in Tamil Nadu, but this kind of equivalence you are trying to make with anti muslim rhetoric in other parts of India and supposed anti brahmin rhetoric in Tamil nadu does not work.
Even here, assuming that this is directed towards brahmins in Tamil Nadu, and not casteism more directly as commentators from tamil nadu like the below say, it is still not at the level of other parties who would openly say anti muslim speeches, you really are telling me this is worse than what T Raja says or what Ramesh Bhiduri said to his own colleague or even worse than Akbaruddin?
Please have a read at the below and at least trust the Tamil Hindus who have regualarly trusted the DMK and will so in the future are not fools, who dont know what is good for them.
Udhayanidhi row: Opposing Sanatana Dharma not new in Tamil Nadu
Read up anti brahmin rhetoric of Dravidian movement {giving seats etc is always a very bad way to gauge that _ I am not a believer of that just used it as a pt}.
There continue to be active caricatures against brahmins. And there was considerable violence against brahmins in the early days of Dravidianism.
The language of Dravidianism is eerily similar to a lot of anti semitic literature for 19th and 20th century Europe.
The Godhead of dravidian politics had said “if you are crossing a road and encounter a poisonous snake and a brahmin” _ stop and kill the brahmin the snake is harmless or something akin to it.
The hatred is real _ why it doesn’t result into violence as you see in H_M violence ^ because the society is not at logger heads and there is not much fuel for the spark to ignite. But these are sparks none the less.
I am not saying that Dravidoids are more dangerous than Rabid RWers. But merely that their language is worse and it’s more systemic and doesn’t get caller out as a lot of the really vile content is not translated out of tamil
I know that the dravidian movment in Tamil Nadu was anti brahmin, because they were the dominant caste in the british administration, similar to why even Ambedkar and Phules work come off as anti brahmin sometimes.
The dravidian movment abandoned Periyars goal of carving a seperate Tamil country in the 1960s, and it is common for admirers of philosophers to seperate the wheat from the chaff, not everyone who reads Hume agress with his white supermacist views and not everyone who reads Periyar will develop a hatred of brahmins, please put more trust in at least the tamil people that they wont support a party which is against their religion.
//The hatred is real _ why it doesn’t result into violence as you see in H_M violence ^ because the society is not at logger heads and there is not much fuel for the spark to ignite. But these are sparks none the less.//
Furthermore, in a state where dalits have been killed, the best I could find that happened with brahmins are isolated incidents of vandlism and harassment, not widespread enough to ignore their dominance in business, white collar work and bureaucracy, which the DMK government for all its supposed anti brahmin values has never tried to take away, if there was really a culture of hatred we would see huge rallies instigating social boycotts aganst brahmins, like we do against muslims, we would see attempts to malign companies run and managed by brahmins like we do with muslims almost regularly, and the tamil nadu elections would be filled with hateful rhetoric that has become so common elsewhere.
It is funny that, rhetoric against casteism in a tamil context origniating sanskritic traditions being defined by casteism( wrongly in my opinon), is supposedly worse than rather open and very clear rhetoric against followers of other religions that does not even make the news anymore.
So no, the sparks are not there to begin with, because what is being targetted in speeches like Udaynidhi, in all liklihood is not a community to begin with. I come back to the same point, the hindus of tamil nadu are not fools to trust people who are hostile to a large part of their own religion.
//I am not saying that Dravidoids are more dangerous than Rabid RWers. But merely that their language is worse and it’s more systemic and doesn’t get caller out as a lot of the really vile content is not translated out of tamil//
When anyone calls a brahmin, something untoward like how Ramesh Bhiduri called his own colleague a terrorist, then you can say this happens or when you can find the tamil version of Sulli deals or when threats are made to withdraw the police for 10 minutes in Mylapore, then we can say this.
I have a sense that you have a contrarian bug but let me try.
I have read Phule Ambedkar and Periyar, Periyar is very very different level.
Brahmins constitute 2-3% of TN at most. Have absolutely zero street power. No willingness and or ability to cause nuisance.
Pray tell me which state in India has 2_3% Muslim population and anti Muslim rhetoric ?
Separating “mere Hate speech” from Hate speech amidst communal tensions is essential.
Let me tell you another example _
A year ago in MH during the Maratha Andolan, a Maratha activist made the exact same statement made by Akbaruddin Owaisi viz MH 3%. The news was barely covered in Marathi newspaper beyond a day or two.
I dont even know if the guy even faces any FIR. The guy was probably trying to learn from Owaisi, but lacked the appeal and charisma of Owaisi.
In the court of law both these cases would go the same way.
When you kept pointing to RWers spouting Hate speech viz Muslims _ thats the content which gets traction and is more likely to occur because of the communal tensions on ground.
So do the underlying simmering tensions make the same speech worse than other ?
Or both ought to be condemned?
Dravidianism used anti Brahmin rhetoric to galvanise the base. No one today thinks it would lead to large scale violence on ground.
But does it mean it’s less bad than Anti Muslim rhetoric on its own ? Just on the merit of the statement ?
Just because it’s not something I worry about doesn’t mean it’s not bad.
Also a lot of real filth from Dravidian discourse doesn’t get translated. We only discuss the really censored stuff. Unlike our North Indian RWers _ whose every comment gets heard. What Udaynidhi says makes noise because Udaynidhi wants it to make the noise
//Also a lot of real filth from Dravidian discourse doesn’t get translated. We only discuss the really censored stuff. Unlike our North Indian RWers _ whose every comment gets heard. What Udaynidhi says makes noise because Udaynidhi wants it to make the noise//
I assure you with absolute certainty, that organization like Hindu Munani and others like them are absolutelt scouring the internet for instances of Dravidian politicans saying anything against Brahmins, unlike the present speech which was made on the floor of the house, the previous one was made in a private gathering of an organization, most would not have even heard of. We dont see these things because there is nothing to find, nothing damining enough in comparison to things said elsewhere.
Periyar is a bigot, I dont disagree but his views are as relevant as Humes views on superiority of the white race when evaluating his own arguments, even if many of Humes admirers wont directly critique him, they are not going to be applying his racism in their own philosophy and daily life. They are not what most of his followers are going for.
//Dravidianism used anti Brahmin rhetoric to galvanise the base.//
Yes before independence, and since the 1960s, till today, DMK politicians are not getting into power by talking rubbish about communities or instigating all kinds of nastiness against brahmins, as I said if they would have, the multiple hindutvadi organizations would have caught it and retweeted it to prominence. Talking about how it used anti brahmin rhetoric in a different time, when brahmins despite being 3% were dominating multiple facets of life, and ignoring how it is not used now, except to target casteism through terms that reflect the identification of sanskritic culture with casteism( wrongly I might add) is giving it relvancy it does not have.
You are repeating that there are tension, but where are these tensions? There are places in India with barely any presence of christians,not more than maybe 10 familes in some villages that leads to them being socially boycotted for their very presence, there are places in the christian northeast where a miniscule minority of mainland Indians, not more than 10% with their right to property or getting government serivices restricted that culminates in violence, where do we see similar tensions in tamil nadu towards brahmins?
This is not me being contrarian, this is the very banal fact that the effects of harmful rhetoric, including tensions and potential for violence is not there in Tamil Nadu, because they are not trying to fight the battles of 1920s in 2020s like other parts of the country.
//A year ago in MH during the Maratha Andolan, a Maratha activist made the exact same statement made by Akbaruddin Owaisi viz MH 3%. The news was barely covered in Marathi newspaper beyond a day or two.
I dont even know if the guy even faces any FIR. The guy was probably trying to learn from Owaisi, but lacked the appeal and charisma of Owaisi.
In the court of law both these cases would go the same way.//
Marathas are 40% of maharashtra, and have a presence in media, why would they exactly spotlight their own community members like this?
You are very wrong comparing Hume to Periyar – it needs to be called out.
Hume was an enlightenment thinker who is known for many things. His “objectionable views” do not define him. 100 other things come to mind when one thinks of Hume.
Periyar is defined by his Anti Brahmin and Anti Hindu rhetoric. Its not a side fact – Its one of his essential contributions.
Likewise Savarkar – whose anti Muslim rhetoric which is kind of what he is known for {though he wrote widely on a variety of issues } doesnt get the pass
I agree however with you that even hardcore DMK walas do not subscribe to his most acerbic utterances – but the core idea was far beyond the zeitgeist he spoke in.
//
Marathas are 40% of maharashtra, and have a presence in media, why would they exactly spotlight their own community members like this?
See you are again missing my point – i meant the statement didnt cause as much stir in MH even among Brahmins – it was sort of ignored as an ugly fact. Because there is not significant animus on ground – anti brahmin violence happened during post 30 Jan but no one think its going to happen.
My Q is : in this background is that statement as condemnable as Owaisi’s ?
See the attached image – all these are recent caricatures not from 1940s => I was completely unaware of this till i found the X handle RealityCheckIndia – that handle does a lot of highlighting work than Hindu Munanni.
Wouldn’t these be categorised as dehumanizing ?
Periyar is reduced to an anti brahmin voice by his detractors outside of Tamil Nadu, within Tamil Nadu he is seen as a voice for rationalism, women’s rights, and Tamil pride. It is kind of like how many hindutvadis see the phules as british stooges.
//Because there is not significant animus on ground – anti brahmin violence happened during post 30 Jan but no one think its going to happen.//
And I keep on repeating there is not a significant animus against brahmins evej in Tamil.nadu. Like there is actually a history of violence against brahmins post Gandhis killing no such thing in Tamil Nadu, even the attempts to sort of paint a picture of brahmins being forced to leave by outsiders fails because many beahmins are still prominent socially and largely left to other states in india and other countries after they no longer had a monopoly on government jobs.
Yes the pictures you show are bad caricatures if they are made purely to stereotype brahmins, it goes without saying that a countey like india with diverse communities many have stereotypical and caricatured ways of seeing others. I have even seen caricatured drawing of ambedkar,in other states of India. The only thing is that there is no ecosystem to broadcast these caricatured of brahmins.
What happens in the twitter account stays in the twitter account,unlike with many other right wing twitter account where an ecosystem exists to spread all its nasty views till it reaches local whatsapp groups, a politicians lips or even media. And this repeated spreading does lead to violence and other efforts st discrimination. No matter what some people on twitter may think about brahmins, or what followers of Periyar may think about brahmincal culture like in many states of India there are no ecosystem that tend to broadcast this hate as means of politics
Whst is missing in Tamil Nadu is reverence towards brahmins, which is present among many communities even in neighboring states, this can be similar anti brahmin feelings elsewhere being present in Tamil.nadu without any structure to spread or normalize them, causes so much grief amongst outsiders.
You are obfuscating in your responses – Periyar comparison with Hume is palpably wrong – comparing him with Phule is wrong.
Just because a section of Hindutvavdis also despise Phule doesn’t mean you compare him with Periyar.
Hume’s white supremacy was reflective, incidental. Phules critiques of Brahmins were academic, rhetorical and work on ground vastly different.
Again i do not think Periyar needs to be solely defined by his brahmin hatred like most complex figures, but it was kind of a USP of the package.
You have avoided answering my simple question ?
Is a call to kill or cleanse Brahmins – which we know isnt going to happen is equivalent to H-M calls for violence ?
are they both condemnable or is one more condemnable because there is significantly higher risk ? What’s the principle behind it
//Is a call to kill or cleanse Brahmins – which we know isnt going to happen is equivalent to H-M calls for violence ?//
You are avoiding one simple thing, where are the calls to openly kill or cleanse brahmins from Tamil Nadu. Yes they are condemnable but are not happening in Tamil Nadu
So far you have some caricatures from some twitter account which are quite common for many communities, especially dalits and muslims where pipeline exist to cause these caricatures to crystallize to violence and udaynidhi calling for the eradication of manuvad with a vocabulary from the early 20th century, but no hostility behind it unlike many other cases throughout India.
Tldr all calls to violence and cleansing are condemnable but udaynidhi as many Tamil tell me did not do so and online caricatures are condemnable.
Note:
Those arent caricatures from X account;
They’re from Dravidian print media – with significant circulation – they’re just compiled on X.
I don’t say Udaynidhi did not call for cleansing – merely that’s its a dog whistle.
Its significant because he is a future CM – unlike T Raja or Akbaruddin;
Ok fair enough the DMK should not identify casteism with one community.
I dont think that the DMK depends on anti brahmin bigotry, and still maintain that Udaynidhis statement are not meant for any community.
We will see if Udaynidhi will be a future CM or not.
To put an end to this discussion:
In my opinion,
1. Caricatures and calls to violence of any community anywhete should not be tolerated and condemnable.
2. Where pipeline exist to crystallize these into violence, this should be taken more seriously.
3. I am willing to trust the Tamil hindus that Udaynadhi called for eradication of manuvad, not Hinduism
4. Tamil Nadu and especially the DMK does not have politics thst depends on hatred and disgust of brahmins as seen in nasty social media narratives not being reflected in media, in political speeches and no attempt to marginalise Tamil brahmins socially even if the DMK should give tickets to brahmins as well
I agree with 1,2 and 3
My point being you cant legally differentiate between 1 and 2 – though both may be equivalent.
I dont agree with 4 // DMK should give tickets to brahmins
Political parties should not give tickets for tokenism. I would want politics to remain as organic as possible – what we can expect is politics that doesnt demonise {though thats not going to happen}
I knew you would try to make a false equivalence with some irrelevant BJP leaders utterings somewhere. Point me to an elected BJP MP/MLA threatening to eradicate Islam or Christianity in a legislative assembly. The two are not comparable.
I think average Tamil doesn’t equate Sanatana with Hinduism.
They equate it with “Brahmanism”.
Its used a code word for Brahmanism – but the choice of using Sanatana in assembly despite pushback is a choice;
He could have easily used “Manuvad” or “Brahmanwad” – he clearly didn’t want to say it as it would not have caused this reaction.
I would wager he wants to redirect the rhetoric from utter failure of DMK in elections to old hatred of brahmins to galvanise the base who might be disappointed.
//I would wager he wants to redirect the rhetoric from utter failure of DMK in elections to old hatred of brahmins to galvanise the base who might be disappointed.//
The DMK have lost many elections and know what it is to be in opposition.
Moreover than that the pushback largely came from right wing supporter previously ,not tamilians. Or even other non RW Indians who bothered to see it there is a cultural nuance they are not getting.
If there are national ambitions in mind it is go cause trouble for the Indi Alliance and congress who suffered the most pushback because of his words
As I have menrioned there is no indication of any anti brahmin bigotry in Tamil Nadu politics as seen from the lack of negative references during elections of media unlike other states.
Do you think Udaynidhi didn’t anticipate this furore ? Its Karti C and other Congressis and Liberals who are clarifying what they mean by Sanataman. – or individuals like you – not DMK itself
Udaynidhi ought to know well enough how his comments will be perceived – the fact that he chose to reiterate his own comments is telling.
I dont think Udaynidhi cares, most people who are bothered and offended are not tamilians.
And this kind of thing affects the congress more because it has to answer to voters from other states. If there is a national.intention to this and maybe there is, the DMK is using this to get back at the congress
And obviously, Tamil hindus being insulted for their political choices, does not hurt.
Udaynidhi did not threaten to eradicate any religion, please read up on how sanathanam is understood in Tamil Nadu. The hypocrisy you arw trying to highlight does not exist. Tamil hindus are not stupid to vote for a party that hates their religion
Both of the example I highlighted are MLAs, even T Raja is an MLA, he ever does act on it within hos constituency or protects those who do act on it would it be unnoteworthy if he does not do it on the floor of the legislative house? What a a bad way of moving the goalpost.
Udaynidhi said the same thing in a private gathering by your logic, so by your logic it should not be taken seriously at all
There is a difference in something being said in a random public gathering versus the floor of a legislative assembly. In most democracies worth their salt, no leader would make such a statement and even if he did, those would be expunged from the record at least.
As for your argument about Tamil Hindus electing those folks – perhaps look a bit wider and understand that if the political paradigm revolves around Periyarism then obviously Hindus qua Hindus aren’t a constituency? Probably explains the obsession with caste rhetoric while simultaneously continuing with polarising caste politics and not doing much to alleviate those social issues. I read somewhere that when Karunanidhi became bed ridden, he had an Arunthatiyar care taker to clean his excrement lol. Truth is, DMK cares about lower castes as much as BJP cares for Hindu middle class.
To me this is a clear exhibition of the brutal math of Indian politics – can you divide by caste what you can unite by religion or vice-versa.
//There is a difference in something being said in a random public gathering versus the floor of a legislative assembly. In most democracies worth their salt, no leader would make such a statement and even if he did, those would be expunged from the record at least.//
There is no difference, in both cases in casts a shadow on possible victims in their own constituency. In most democracies, open calls to violence and killing would be taken.much more seriously than calls to eliminate casteism said in a local idiom.
As far as Tamil hindus not thinking of themselves as hindus and probably just their caste, you only need to be personally religious and think that your religion is net positive both of which are present in copious amounts among Tamil hindus, you dont need to be a political community to find calls to eliminate your religion offensive which as many Tamil commentators point out is not what is being said.
I think Nachiketa has specifically said that the choice of words is deliberate despite the backlash from last time so please spare me the gaslighting.
He is assuming it is to rally his base.
That is not definite. He may just want to cause trouble for the congress, furnish his anti bjp credentials by getting many to degrade Tamil hindus for their choices or be trolling right wingers elsewhere.
Lots of options given the backlash eas not in Tamil Nadu. Nachiketa also said tjst Tamil Nadu understand Sanatham Dharma to ve casteism why are you ignoring that still.
Also I find it ironic that a family that personally engages in casteist practices is supposedly at the forefront of fighting it. For a state run on eradicating caste, it is funny that TN still has one of the lowest rates of inter-caste marriage. Far lower than even the so-called dehati North Indians. Truth is caste is what African poverty is to aid driven NGOs. A political cash cow to milk and conveniently hide behind. It is also interesting that a supposed Christian can only find fault in Hindu cultural practices when caste is a cross-religion phenomenon in TN.
Dravidian Progressivism is a Scam – Brown Pundits
I had written this bit a few months ago
Udaynidhi is not a christian. Stop repeating this lie.
He said in one speech he is such but also said he is muslim, hindu and atheist elsewhere.
Yes Dravidianism needs to work on casteism, setting up training institutes to train backward caste males to serve in even major temple like Meenakshi Amman is a good start.
Yes. I wouldnt be surprised if Udaynidhi would attack Vijay’s Christian identity if it suits his politics.
I agree, I have not seen old school RSS types disrepect Islamic figures.
The thing is that mocking religious figures is extremely harmful for any society and causes social instability and ineccesant wars and most educated people know this.
However, you should note that there is no Islamic wing, political party or Islamic government paying trolls to mock Hindu dieties.
There are thousands of accounts online being run from Pakistan that showcase all the dark sides of Indian culture, (and vice versa) but while the Pakistani ISPR trolls focus on cultural practises, the BJP Hindu trolls focus on mocking Islam.
This is one of the reasons why Indian soft power has taken a hit in MENA countries.. they went overboard with mocking genocide in Gaza and also in mocking Islam.
“while the Pakistani ISPR trolls focus on cultural practises, the BJP Hindu trolls focus on mocking Islam.”
Our trolls are not as bad as yours. This is…….some seriously one-eyed tribal BS.
Till date Palestine has offered 0 support to India regarding their state of JK. India has offered more than 200 million dollars of their money for Palestine. Amd, you are miffed at their mocking of Gaza???
And, by the way, do you endorse, swearing on your god, the snuffing off of 1200 lives by Islamic terrorists on Oct 7, 2023? Or, are you in need of a proof?
I keep saying that I don’t care what other people do. They have the right to practice their faith the way they like. At the same time, I have the right to feel what I feel about it.
I will admit on record that I am viscerally disgusted by idol worship. I intellectually understand that this is because of my cultural conditioning as a Muslim. Intellectual understanding is one thing but one’s feelings are something else.
Incidentally, I had an idol of Saraswati somewhere (it might be in New York now). I consider it an object of art. But I’d never pray to it. I’m not some kind of Islamic fundamentalist as people here seem to think of me.
It’s actually a liberal position to say that people can do what they like and I don’t have to like it.
These are definitely things that Indian Muslims and Hindus have to work out.
Since I live in a country where 1% of the population is Hindu, it’s not really my problem.
And I do want to second your point that at least we can talk about these issues on BP though personally I think it would be better if we steered away from criticism of religion.
This whole thing started because XTM brought up the “Satanic Verses” and the “Daughters of God”. Obviously, it’s his right to do so. I would have refrained from doing so but that’s my judgement.
I am not ‘disgusted’ by idol worship at all since I am very familiar with it, it’s been practised for thousands of years in every society, and there is a good reason for it and a deep human yearning for it.
I think your American upbringing is partly responsible for this (more than Muslim upbringing) since it appears very rudimentary and not glamourous. Every American I have met just finds worshipping idols extremely alien.
I don’t think it has anything to do with being American.
I remember learning to read the Quran with my nani. Surah al Baqarah makes a point about about how the Jews kept worshiping the golden calf even after Hazrat Musa told them not to and Allah was very upset.
I keep saying that I really don’t care what other people do. But it is disingenuous for the Hindus here to pretend like they don’t intellectually understand that idol worship is something that is a red line for Muslims.
I think i agree with Q here;
I have had many encounters with Muslims in personal capacity where they were very respectful about Hindu traditions – one carpenter arguing considerably over ideal placement of home mandir – he didnt think what was suggested was as per Hindu Vastu and adviced other way.
But as Kabir has reiterated – there would be significant numbers who agree with him.
//
But it is disingenuous for the Hindus here to pretend like they don’t intellectually understand that idol worship is something that is a red line for Muslims.
As hard as it may sound for you – Hindus do not think so – vast majority of them {not ones you see arguing on Reddit and X} have only superficial understanding about tenets of Islam
You’re talking about the Indian context. Indian Muslims understand that they are a minority in your country. And if someone is working for you (as in doing carpentry in your home), he is not going to be inclined to antagonize you.
Hindus are 1% of Pakistan’s population. They barely exist in Punjab. They are not going to flaunt their idol worship in a Muslim-majority society. They’re not stupid.
I’m not endorsing this but simply recognizing reality.
Sadly the whole TNT “your heroes are our villains etc” is very true. The battle between polytheism and monotheism isn’t going to be resolved one way or the other. It’s not so much an issue for Pakistanis since we don’t really have polytheists but of course it’s an issue in India.
Your ancestors are Hindus. They existed and hence you are. Don’t complain.
and your ancestors before them worshiped nature and spirits not hindu deities
Don’t tell me who my ancestors are.
My father’s family came from Iran. He knows this for a fact.
In any case, we have been Muslims for hundreds of years. All that matters is that we saw the light of the true faith.
Light of the True Faith?
Muslims consider Islam the True Faith.
I’m also allowed to be snarky once in a while.
begs the question; which Islam?
Sunnism or Shi’ism is a pretty major sectarian split
Both believe in the shahada which is foundational for any Muslim, whether Sunni or Shia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahada
Exactly! Sunnis and Shias agree that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet.
That is the minimal definition of being a Muslim.
The dispute between Sunnis and Shias has to do with who should have been caliph after the Prophet’s death.
intriguingly by that definition then we are also Muslim.. (we are not)
Do Bahai’s believe in the shahada? Sunnis and Shias both believe in the finality of Muhammad’s (pbuh) prophethood. Not familiar with Bahai beliefs on this.
We believe he is a Messenger of God; we don’t accept his finality obviously ..
But the Shahada doesn’t mention finality ..
All Muslims believe that the Prophet Muhammad is the final messenger of God. This is a fundamental tenet of Islam.
That’s the whole issues with Ahmedis. This is not to defend the Pakistani parliament declaring them non-Muslim. I don’t believe that it is the place of parliament to do so. It’s up to Allah to decide who is or is not Muslim.
But clearly the Ahmedis have crossed the fundamental red line that Prophethood as an institution ends with the Prophet Muhammad.
Also the Shahada is not usually translated as “Muhammad is A Messenger” but rather “Muhammad is THE Messenger”.
That’s the crucial difference.
All human ancestors were this ape like creature that walked on 4 legs. I don’t see what’s the flex here. Not everyone needs to worship their ancestors.
**Hindus are 1% of Pakistan’s population. They barely exist in Punjab. They are not going to flaunt their idol worship in a Muslim-majority society. They’re not stupid.**
And yet the Muslim minority feels so comfortable offering namaz on public roads and public property here in India. Blatant disregard for law and order and disrupting daily routine. Not to mention blaring the Azaan on a loudspeaker 5 times a day.
Asymmetry much?
If you can be “liberal” about saying Hinduism and idol worship offend you, I’m equally at liberty to say the supposed monotheistic supremacy and blind following of a single individual (idol worship vibes much?) is disgusting and offensive to me.
You’re just doubling down on your anti-Muslim bigotry (which is the definition of Islamophobia).
You’re welcome to do so of course but don’t pretend to have the moral high ground. The “Saffroniate” on this blog is the mirror image of what you think I am.
Comparing a constitutionally secular state and an Islamic Republic is intellectually untenable.
Anything I say that offends you is termed Islamophobia.
You are unable to grasp the distinction between highly offensive language that denigrates worshippers of a certain persuasion based on scriptural sanction and calling out the blatant disregard of law and order by your co-religionists who believe that their religion is above any secular law.
You literally just made an analogy to ISIS. That’s Islamophobia 101.
Don’t you dare to condescend to me. I am probably far better educated and more well-read than you’ll ever be.
Please do let us know which educational institutions in the US and the UK you have degrees from.
I’m not condescending to you, merely pointing out the logical fallacy in your argument.
The rest of your comment is pure deflection.
“You are unable to grasp..”
This is condescension pure and simple. Who the hell do you think you are to tell me what I am able to grasp or not?
For someone who accuses others of “mansplaining” and uses performative feminism to throw tantrums, you are clearly a nasty piece of work.
Don’t you dare to condescend to me. I am probably far better educated and more well-read than you’ll ever be.
Please do let us know which educational institutions in the US and the UK you have degrees from.
So much elite pedigree and education and yet not grace or class or the ability to recognize one’s own hypocrisy even when pointed out multiple times. Such a waste of good education.
As long as you are hiding behind a pseudonym, you have no right to say anything about my education.
My intellectual credentials are out in the public sphere.
How many books have you published? Oh that’s right. None.
I mean even Mein Kampf was published.
Now that Godwin’s Law has been invoked, I guess it’s time to end this conversation.
musicology. good is relative.
Passive aggressive.
Now you are denigrating Ethnomusicology. Just goes to show how uncultured you are.
SOAS is one of the best institutions in the world.
RNJ: You hide behind a pseudonym. You have no right to say anything about anyone’s education.
Unless you have a PhD from Harvard or something you better sit down and shut up. There is no comparison between you and me.
Hindus did not impose their views until you made the first move. You crossed the red line…you violated it.
Oh please! You are new to BP.
I have experienced intense Islamophobia on this forum. I have been given a direct threat of violence.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Says the people imposing an Indo-European religion on the adivasis and veddah people that predate Hinduisms development by eons.
This is a ignorant comment
Consider the source. Its like saying Chai tea. Or Naan bread.
Exactly. To quote Hamid Dalwai, Hindu communalism is a reaction to Muslim communalism.
Not all Americans. Mainly the Bible Belt evangelical types.
Every American I have met just finds worshipping idols extremely alien
Not all Americans. Mainly the Bible Belt evangelical types.
Most Protestants, not just Evangelicals find Idol worship alien. Not just alien, Evil Devil Worship.
That includes Sri Lankan Protestants
Catholics dont have problem because they too indulge in idol worship (Virgin Mary etc)
We find idol worship beautiful and that the Satanic Verses are not so Satanic.
Muslims would be far better off if they added back, as the Holy Quran itself agrees, that Al-Lat, Al-Uzza & Al-Manat are added back to the Pantheon.
It would go some way to balancing the “maleness” in Islam. Women are nearly invisible except of course in Shi’ite Islam (but that’s the Persianate inheritance).
What are the superpowers of Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Al-Manat that Al-Lah does not possess?
You are entitled to your opinion but respectfully you are not Muslim.
The Quran is the divinely revealed word of Allah. It’s not something you can add or subtract from.
The Quran makes it very clear that Allah has no offspring.
This is not something that is going to be up for debate in Islam.
“Women are nearly invisible”– Chador aur Char Diwari is an important part of our culture. Why do non-Pakistanis care so much about what we do in our country? We want our women kept away from the lecherous eyes of unrelated men.
Why are Musla men, In India, West and East Pakistan, the paragons of hawas in Islam….often kidnapping non-Muslim women, forcibly converting them under mental duress and physical intimidation, and then ultimately coercing them with death threats if they speak the truth? It all happens in Pakistan. So, don’t be oblivious to it. Rules for women but not to men???
And, then there is Bachabaazi. Yep!! Outsiders don’t care about what happens in Pakistan unlike what you think but hey…even those who reside in there.. don’t care.
Indian troops have raped over 30,000 Kashmiri Muslim women. Muslim women are still getting raped and murderd by hindutva mobs across India.
This is fake propaganda and needs to be deleted.
These are substantiated facts. Your troops have committed a genocide in Kashmir and no Kashmiri will ever forgive them.
I think your delusional brain has find/replaced Pakistan army and Bangladesh with your preferred propaganda.
Understandable cope. Who wants to retain the memory of 93000 soldiers of their Phaujjjj forced to remove their pants and beg for the Indian army to save their lives from the Bangladeshi retribution that was inevitable.
Your fascist army has yet to face justice for the tens of thousands of muhajirs it murdered and raped in East Pakistan going back to the late 50s when they first started training and funding proxy militants like the mukhti bahini.
Kunan Puspora, Asiya and Neelofar.
It is a fact that the Indian Army rapes Kashmiri Muslim women and disappears Kashmiri Muslim men.
You can keep hiding from these facts. Wouldn’t expect anything else from a right-wing Indian.
I think it was 20k last week. Our man at least understands arithmetic progression.
The tag teaming of the trolls is …amusing.
This is anti-Pakistan rhetoric 101.
I have a long record on this blog. I have never once defended forced conversion.
But watch you reach for the most obvious anti-Pakistan tropes “Bachabazi” etc.
It’s not like child abuse doesn’t happen in India.
I am perfectly capable of coming up with a long list of the seamy sides of Indian society but that wouldn’t be productive.
Goalposts for ‘personal disgust’ seem to be quite…mobile.
I don’t care what you like or do not. I like how I pray…that could be an image or a Vigraha or a murthi. I see divinity in a stone after it has been put theough a ritual.
I don’t believe god is confined to a black cube, and I don’t think that you should be blocking roads, or praying on the aisles of an airplane or need certain soecial.privileges.
Nothing in you can even measure or capture the disgusting feeling when I am told that my way of worship is wrong. Who are you?
Clearly you haven’t actually read my comments. It’s not really worth my while to engage with you but for the record:
I really don’t care what Hindus do. I’ve stated multiple times that Hindus (like all other people) should be free to practice their religion the way they like.
At the same time, to pretend like you don’t intellectually understand that idol worship viscerally offends Muslims, is disingenuous.
Since I live in a country which is 97% Muslim, none of this is really my problem. There is no idol worship happening around me.
People need to understand that if you mock or abuse them, it will be returned with interest. It is a two way street.
Q’s comment was in fact very measured and balanced; your reply is unwarranted.
Lol
BB is on ‘vanvaas’ and EK is rampant spouting off on the comment threads.
Noticeable.
BB is on vanvaas because he doxxed EK and revealed his location.
Convenient of you to forget that part.
yes this vanvass has been going for quite a while!
who is EK – El Khwaja ?
//For instance, Muslims and Christians might feel uncomfortable walking through streets filled with Hindu deities during festivals—or perhaps most do not.//
Most Indian christians and muslims dont feel any comfort or discomfort as this is part of our daily life in India.
And I dont know how one can say, that the problems that hindutvadis have with muslims dont extend to their beliefs, that is the basis of their contestation, among the very first actual fights with Hindus and muslims was with someone allegedly something blasphemous about the prophet and his own iconclasm is located as the basis of the iconclasm of the turkic invaders. Even the insistence on conversion, is a result of islamic belief system. The islamic belief system and its revivalist imposition, has been the center of the hindutva objection to Indian muslims.
That they may support the objection to Satanic verses, is less out of any respect and more due to themselves agreeing that religious belief should not be insulted. Even any respect given is more towards arab muslims or other richer muslims, not necessarily towards islamic belief itself.
Yes, I think it is obvious that Hindutvadis have issues with basic tenets of Islam.
“One of the first actual fights was with someone allegedly blasphemous…”– I guess you’re referring to the controversy around “Rangila Rasul”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangila_Rasul
Yes exactly that. The person should not have been killed by Muslims for whatever he had written.
Of course. I don’t think anyone here is defending murdering blasphemers.
Btw, I have written about the Blasphemy Law here:
https://kabiraltaf.substack.com/p/the-assassination-of-salman-taseer
just FYI:
“Rangila Rasul was written in reply to Sitaka Chinala a pamphlet written by a Musalman alleging that Sita wife of Rama, the hero of Ramayana was a prostitute.”
Lest we forget
The monkey balancing never stops. Anyone with half a brain knows who initiates most violence and repression.
I’ve seen many Indians mock our religion online and say despicable stuff about the prophet so that overly simplified narrative in the post isn’t true. Most Muslims probably wouldn’t be able to name a single Hindu deity or know the names of their holy scriptures.
Also shoehorning and transposing online inter religious discourse especially that with Pakistanis onto real life politics in India with regards to Indian Muslims, isn’t exactly logical and fails to understand that Indian Muslims and their liberal advocates in India shouldn’t be made collateral for some TCS/cognizant-sponsored cyber disinfo network getting their feelings hurt online.
It is easy to be an apologetic but the fact is that if you do not know something and earnestly seek to know then you would get an answer. Unfortunately, pretending victimhood is a familiar drama. Many Ms say many horrific things about Hindus…typical talking points. Pakistan is a perfect example….a nation born out of hatred. And, you can’t put any soin on it. I would admire an honest Muslim…still looking.
Pakistan was not borne out of “hatred.”
Did I just say hatred? Sorry. Extreme Paranoia, and unspeakable intolerance in the hearts and minds towards Hindus etc were also reaponsible.
You’re projecting
Gaura. Is trying to do a monkey balancing here. It is a fact that Hindu philosophy and Islamic mentality are unequivocally incompatible.it surprises me how the Muslims overnight decided for themselves to stay back in India.post-partition. Did the thought not cross their mind that they were actually going to stay with Hindus whose notion of God is completely different from their view?
we welcome you to BP but please refrain from provocative use of language like “cultist.”
Not everything is an IT cell. Does it ever occur to you that respect is a very fine characteristic to be wielded with precision.
The language in BP has always been one of a subtle sublime provocative hate towards Hindus. I would rather you admit the true nature of BP. Lol.
Oh please!
BP has soft Hindutva leanings.
This is quite obvious to anyone who is truly neutral.
Of course the arbiter of who or what is truly neutral is our esteemed highness.
Passive aggressive.
The default setting on this forum is soft Hindutva. We’ve seen this in the discussions of the “civilization state” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai”. These are not center-left positions.
By your logic, BP is soft Hindutva but its arguing pulsating with intellectual freedom and a very vigorous Cresceniate faction.
So presumably you’d also agree Dharma is inherently pluralistic in that case going by the example of BP?
It is really not up for debate that the “civilization state” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai” are soft Hindutva positions. They are certainly not center-left positions and are not espoused by the Congress Party–the official center-left party in India.
I agree that the “Cresceniate” is stronger than it has been in the past. That is largely because I refused to accept soft Hindutva priors.
Anyway, as long as everyone is free to express their points of view, it’s fine.
Every forum has a bias. There is no problem owning yours.
Arguments like Skanda’s that BP has always been anti-Hindu by default are ridiculous. From the very beginning when Omar was much more active his main opponent was PakNationalism. Soft Hindutva was often given a pass.
Though i disagree with Kabir’s arbitration on what constitutes Center right left etc – i think he is right in the essentials.
I would say all the 3 founders of the blog – Razib – Omar and XTM have “some” sympathies with Indian civilization which can be construed as soft Hindutva – whereas theyre not fans of TNT.
I would put myself in the same camp.
But its equally fair to that all sides are heard here !
Wikipedia is a neutral source. Hopefully we can all agree on that?
Wiki calls Indian National Congress a center-left party.
I don’t think Razib had sympathies with soft Hindutva. He just generally didn’t like religion.
As I said, Omar’s main concern was the “ideology of Pakistan” or as he calls it “PakNationalism”.
If we just go by objective facts, the commenters on here don’t seem to hold to the views of the INC (which is my definition of center-left).
Calvin seems to be the most left of center on anyone on here. That’s just my interpretation.
our views on TNT are very complex.
we do see that a Muslim elite needed a “home” to be able to express itself. a Cabinet Mission Plan might have been tenable but too much of a counter-factual.
our goal now is softer to non-existent border and good will and amity and love for all.
erm really?
Muslims are internally varied, many muslims in india dont think or care about others beliefs especially large amounts if lower class muslims who were never consulted.
Please dont essentialize unnecessarily.
I would want to think so. But read one of comments by Kabir above.
Kabir:
You’re talking about the Indian context. Indian Muslims understand that they are a minority in your country. And if someone is working for you (as in doing carpentry in your home), he is not going to be inclined to antagonize you.
Hindus are 1% of Pakistan’s population. They barely exist in Punjab. They are not going to flaunt their idol worship in a Muslim-majority society. They’re not stupid.
I’m not endorsing this but simply recognizing reality.
Sadly the whole TNT “your heroes are our villains etc” is very true. The battle between polytheism and monotheism isn’t going to be resolved one way or the other. It’s not so much an issue for Pakistanis since we don’t really have polytheists but of course it’s an issue in India.
These kind of comments are what if am referring to in this post. You may or may not believe Kabir.
I think Kabir is unique even among Pakistanis though I dont think many muslims in Pakistan would be that different from him, for a supposed liberal, I am surprised at how attached to Islam he really is. Reminds me of some cultural hindus here.
I think this blog can really benefit from religious Indian muslims, to know how common these kinds of thoughts are.
Reminds me of some cultural hindus here.
Again unnecessary monkey balancing. Most cultural Hindus would not defend shocking opinions like patriarchy, identity based discrimination etc. unlike our Pakistani brethren.
Most cultural hindus seem to only see these things when it is done by Muslims.
I think it would be fair to call me a cultural Muslim.
I really don’t worry all that much about religion in my real life.
Even on this forum, I only defend Islam when it is attacked.
But why defend Islam in the first place? I personally would not police someone who says anything negative about christianity, even if I consider myself a cultural christian/catholic. One thing I have noticed when indulging in discussion with right in India, is that one can either defend their religion or its followers, but not both.
Islam will be okay, no matter what, but one cant say the same thing about its followers in the subcontinent.
“But why defend Islam in the first place?”
Why does the “Saffroniate” on here defend Hinduism?
Islam is a part of my identity even if I don’t really practice the religion. That’s precisely what being a cultural Muslim means.
Anyway, I’ve consistently been saying on here that we should not be criticizing anyone’s religious beliefs. That goes for everyone.
It would really be better if this topic is avoided in future.
When religion is very intertwined with culture, you cant criticize a culture without criticizing religion, even if indirectly.
There are many aspects of all major religions one cant talk about without at least referring to religion, and especially with Islam in the subcontinet, with religious revivalism being such a major part of culture, we will inevitably run into religious criticism when speaking about them. You yourself have said that Pakistan exists because of Islam and many of its activities are legitimate only because it is an islamic republic. Criticism of Pakistan inevitably will lead to criticism of Islam.
As far as why the saffroniate defends hinduism, probably the same reason you defend islam despite not being religious, it is a very important part of their identity, and even if not the center of, is hugely influential in forming the identity of India and has become even more intertwined with identity of India, leading to criticism of India being seen as criticism of their own religion itself.
I understand that culture and religion are linked–or rather that religion is a subset of culture.
I generally try to steer away from religious debate. I’m sorry I took the bait regarding XTM’s comment about the “Satanic Verses”. I stand by the fact that I find references to Allah having offspring very distasteful but it was really not worth this whole back and forth.
Historically, this forum has been far more sensitive about criticism of Hinduism than about criticism of Islam. I have been yelled at for saying I don’t care for The Ramayana. Meanwhile, the worst kind of Islamophobia goes unchecked. Just to give you one example–and I don’t want to keep hounding on it– the word “taqiyaa” was used towards me. That is unforgivable.
Criticism of Pakistan is one thing and criticism of Islam is something else entirely.
Every forum has its own norms, which is fine. All I’m saying is that, in countries like the US, one doesn’t discuss religion in public. This is precisely because someone is likely to get offended. People are entitled to their religious views and these should not be discussed in mixed company.
I would be fine with criticism of any religion (including Islam) done in a sensitive and academic fashion. What we see here is not that but rather Islamophobia 101.
My arguments usually come from a Pakistani nationalist framework and counter Indian nationalist arguments. Believe me, I really have very little interest in religion as such.
Also, I just want to clarify this “Pakistan exists because of Islam” thing because my actual argument is far more nuanced:
My argument is that Pakistan exists because the Muslim-majority provinces of British India–which was not a nation-state but a colony– opted out of being part of a Hindu-majority nation-state. I’m arguing that they were entitled to do so and that this was an exercise of the right to self-determination. This is my counter to the argument made here that Pakistan is based on “apartheid”.
Since I’m not really interested in a religious debate, I’m not going to be commenting on this particular thread again. But the rest of you should feel free to carry on.
I don’t think anybody in the Saffroniate defends outdated or bizarre practices in Hinduism. We defend our right to retaliate because the opposing ideology questions the very right of our existence.
You may think words don’t matter, but centuries of hate have translated into horrific crimes against pagans just because somebody claimed that idol worshippers are sub human do not deserve to live. The systematic rape and genocide of the Yazidis (the most recent) is precisely because of such weaponized hatred.
None of the commentator from the crescent here are questioning your right to existence. Making equialvalences with the commentators here and ISIS is quite bizarre.
Furthermore, in my engagements with people similar to the sadfroniate, they have shown more interest in faults and issues eith other religions rather than Islam even when things are brought up regarding their own, many would try to bring other religion in some way as a diversion.
Please share an instance where the Saffroniate have deflected remarks on flaws in their own and focused on the other?
Please re-read what I wrote. The ideology that the Crescentiate follow does question our right to existence. I never said that any commenter here has done that.
You do indulge in a fair bit of monkey balancing even when the facts suggest otherwise.
Can you share instances where issues in India have been brought up at all? Most of the content on this blog focus on Pakistan and issues within Muslims, particularly those of the subcontinent. Elsewhere issues within india have been dealt with exactly how I have mentioned.
I dont indulge in monkey balancing, the thing is many have already made up their mind about cultural factors having no role to play in muslim.bad behaviour, and have essentialized islam to basically what ISIS or Taliban do. Rather than seeing them as one way of practise based on cultural factors of the areas they are from.
If you go back and look at earlier posts you will see that there is a clear pattern. There is far more criticism of Pakistan and of Islam than there is of India.
Some of the “Saffroniate” have no other agenda than to denigrate Pakistan. Quite triggering language like “apartheid”, “kleptocracy” etc has been used.
Anyone who is truly neutral–neither Indian nor Pakistani– would be able to identify this pattern.
You need to answer my question first, not respond with another one.
Was Rangila Rasool due to cultural reasons or more recently the TCS case?
You refuse to see a clear pattern where scriptural sanction has resulted in many unfortunate incidents. That is not just monkey balancing but repeatedly gaslighting victims by making excuses for the perpetrators.
I think Calvin has chosen to defend on that hill.
Personally i have done that a lot before giving up – so i do see where a lot of his arguments come from. But i think we shouldn’t be uncivil in mere disagreement – Calvin has been very civil and considerate in his pushbacks
Just worth reiterating this – I had commented this on your thread with Kabir Calvin,
Worth acknowledging ? Who lite the first spark and also who got the first “HIT”
I was not aware of Sitala Chandak.
I dont recall, justifying the murder due to Rangia rasool. I dont think this action-reaction nonsense is particular useful. The only person who deserves violence meted out on them in retaliation for violence are those who do violence themselves. Often times this search for initial perpetrator are justifications for violence on those who may share charscterists but otherwise bear no relation with original perpetrators.
I think it is worth mentioning that every community has their triggers for which human life is of no consequence, for muslims it is the character of the prophet, for Sikhs descecration( real or imaginary ) of the guru Granth sahib, for christians it can be anything that is defined as part of religious outgroup(including other christians at times) and you can decide yourself what triggers are for your own community. I wont go on to ask why in coubtrys these triggers result in death while in others even muslim.majoroty country’s it results in imprisonment.
https://www.christiandaily.com/news/christian-in-indonesia-arrested-for-comments-on-muhammad
Rangia Rasool is barbaric and has no place in polite society nor does killing for any of your religious triggers.
As far as TCS case is concerned, I dont know why you are applying the mentality of the perpetrators there to muslims as a whole. What makes you think that muslims at large even support the perpetrators?
I dont see unfortunately incidents, thwt involve perpetrators of only one community.
I didn’t imply you condoned violence. But Kabir brought up Rangila Rasool as Hindus insulting the prophet. I clarified the often forgotten aspect that that piece of insulting publication was not unprovoked.
You probably didnt know – but i find it hard to believe Kabir didnt – he didnt mention it as it was inconvenient.
Insult was met with insult. But next insult was met with Murder.
That is the pattern, it was also followed during Bangalore riots 2020.
Its absolutely fine for communities to have varying standards of what is acceptable and what is not. Getting triggered doesn’t give us right to murder people.
And if you don’t think one group indulges a lot more in this than others.
//
What makes you think that muslims at large even support the perpetrators?
We have Pew and other surveys where a large % of Muslims say they agree with what happened to Rushdie or Charlie Hebdo. The number is disproportionately higher than all other faiths.
https://theconversation.com/the-politics-of-blasphemy-why-pakistan-and-some-other-muslim-countries-are-passing-new-blasphemy-laws-198647
I dont think this ought to be particularly controversial.
I decided to become Nachiketa 2 days ago after discussions regarding finer details of Aisha came up on this blog.
The fear is real – and i have decided myself to be cautious on public forum.
I wouldnt be doing this if we were discussing Jesus or Ram – to deny this is Ostrich syndrome.
For the record, I was not aware of the background to “Rangila Rasool”. I just knew it was a famous blasphemy case.
“Getting triggered doesn’t give us the right to murder people”–
I absolutely agree. I have written about the assassination of Salman Taseer and the abuses of the Blasphemy Law.
Didn’t you attend some of the most elite universities in the universe? Didn’t they teach you to verify your references and look up primary sources before forming opinions as strong as you generally profess?
Passive aggressive.
Calling out your terrible research methodology and partisanship isn’t passive aggression.
Within just the last month, female infanticide, gender rights, India’s policy with respect to LTTE are just 3 issues India that I have personally acknowledged as significant issues where India went wrong or needs to do better. The only difference is, you won’t Pakistani Leftists (to the extent that anyone in Pakistan can be called one) bringing up any issues with Islam or Pakistan here whereas you are first to jump to draw false equivalence between India and Pakistan. The asymmetry is pretty clear.
Why do you expect Pakistanis on here to bring up our nation’s dirty laundry in front of a hostile audience?
This is not a realistic expectation.
@Kabir
Are we here representing countries though? This forum isn’t model UN for many of us. I understand that you are not anonymous, so you might have to show more discretion, but for me as an anonymous person, I can say i am just here, not repping the USA, India, Hindus, my jati, Karnataka, or anything. I *do* have my biases, informed by these affiliations, but I’m happy to be challenged. Someone can assert that contemporary Indian society is significantly more liberal than Pakistan, and also say that Indian society’s dehumanization of dalits is still worse than anywhere else, or that there is a crisis of public hygiene in modern India despite admirable economic growth.
There are clearly two teams on this blog: the “Saffroniate” and the “Crescentiate”. You may not see yourself as belonging to either team and that’s fine.
I for one will never bring up my nation’s dirty laundry in front of a hostile audience.
Similarly, I don’t expect the Indians on here to acknowledge the atrocities your army commits in Occupied Kashmir–all of which have been amply documented.
Unfortunately, this blog is very much Indians vs. Pakistanis.
On a lighter note, this blog is hardly that important that the Pakistan Army is going to check up on what I am saying here.
False equivalence again. India and most Indians don’t deny that there have been incidents of violation of human rights and most of the Indian commentariat would happily discuss these issues fairly openly if it were not for Pakistani commentators interceding in bad faith. To be clear, I am fine with Pakistanis debating Indian issues as well but the traffic is clearly one way which makes this whole thing asymmetric against India and Indians.
Oh please! There has never been an honest discussion of what happens in Occupied Kashmir on this blog.
Your army rapes Kashmiri Muslim women and disappears Kashmiri Muslim men. Kunan Pushpora, Asiya and Neelofar are just two examples.
You can choose to ignore these facts since they are inconvenient for the Indian nationalist narrative.
Occupied Kashmir is not an “Indian issue”. It is a Disputed Territory.
I have a very strong suspicion that you are Indosaurus under a new name.
Oh please! There has never been an honest discussion of what happens in Occupied Kashmir on this blog
Of course we cannot have a serious discussion. This blog is full Pakistanis bringing up bad faith arguments and made up facts.
I have a very strong suspicion that you are Indosaurus under a new name.
Ok? No idea who that is but what am I supposed to do? Is Indosaurus a banned user?
“This blog is full of Pakistanis”– There are a grand total of three Pakistanis and far more Indians. What are you advocating? Would you like a ban on Pakistanis? Then this forum shouldn’t be called “Brown Pundits” but “Indian Pundits”. That’s fine but let’s be clear what you’re asking for. A ban on Pakistanis would be deeply ironic given that Omar–one of the co-founders of this blog–is himself a Pakistani.
If you’re not Indosaurus, I apologize. But the reason I was suspicious is that your argumentation is almost exactly like his as is your extreme animus towards Sbarrkum and myself.
Would you like a ban on Pakistanis? Then this forum shouldn’t be called “Brown Pundits” but “Indian Pundits”.
Can you please point me to where I asked or even implied that Pakistanis should be banned? My limited point is that it is not possible to have honest and serious conversations because Pakistani commentariat will invariably interject with caricatures on Indian/Hindu social issues which helps no one and definitely doesn’t foster a healthy discussion. This, combined with the relative lack of similar criticisms of Pakistani/Islamic failings makes this whole blog a hostile space to (at least some) Indians despite the leanings of its founders.
If you’re not Indosaurus, I apologize. But the reason I was suspicious is that your argumentation is almost exactly like his as is your extreme animus towards Sbarrkum and myself.
I am not really offended by much but apology accepted anyway lol. Also I don’t have any personal animosity against you. I only find your hypocrisy quite hard to fathom and suffer through. You may find it shocking but I’ve actually read more than half of your substack posts and agree with a lot.
As for Sbarrkum, it is hard not to hate someone who spews hate in every other comment here and is often lying outright.
You complained that this blog is “full of Pakistanis”. There are only three. For a long time, I was the only Pakistani.
From that complaint, it was a reasonable inference that you would like there to be less Pakistanis. If that wasn’t what you intended, I apologize.
With respect, I think that the characterization of this blog as a hostile space for Indians is ridiculous. This blog clearly has soft Hindutva tendencies. I’ve given the example of the “civilization state” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai” so I won’t belabor that. More pertinently, I (a Pakistani Muslim) am the only one who received a direct threat of violence.
Whatever your feelings about this blog, you will have to admit it’s certainly not a PakNationalist forum.
One of the signs of successful moderation is that no one is completely happy. I make no bones about the fact that I would like to see BB banned for life. But that’s not going to happen so I’ve made my peace with it.
As for “caricatures of Indian/Hindu social issues”, there are also plenty of “caricatures” of Pakistan’s internal problems. It’s quite telling that you don’t notice how the constant use of “kleptocracy”, “apartheid” etc grates on Pakistanis.
Thanks for reading my Substack. I’ll take you at your word that you don’t have any personal animosity towards me but frankly your comments here come across as if you do.
It would be far better for all concerned if the commentariat on this blog (and I mean all of us) learn how to have academic discussions focused on ideas rather than on the people articulating those ideas.
Black Vigo
Passive aggressive.
For the last time, I am an American national. No one can do anything to me.
+1
interrogation is good for the soul
Sorry, I don’t understand this comment.
I am not going to wash Pakistan’s dirty laundry in front of a hostile audience. Others are free to take a different position.
You will have to admit that this blog is (unfortunately) Indians vs. Pakistanis, “Saffroniate” vs. “Crescentiate”. I am not going to undermine my own team.
I don’t really believe in teams.
Ideally, there wouldn’t be teams. But you will have to admit that the way this blog is currently structured there are two distinct camps which you have named the “Saffroniate” and the “Crescentiate”.
We rarely see members of either camp criticizing each other. One would have expected BB’s direct threat of violence to be called out but even that was apparently too much for the “Saffroniate”.
I have no issues disagreeing with Q and EK when necessary but even then I tend to be much politer to them than to those that I’m opposed to. So the camps definitely exist.
Of course there are people who are not in either camp. Nachiketa, girmit and Calvin come to mind.
there is a fairly large mixed camp..
Yes I dont think Pakistani leftists are doing a good job either.
I only established parity when parity exists. And from my own recollection my main point was that in similar cases, Pakistani women fare the same as Indians women as per the data I could find. And the data I brought up did show Pakistani women are less likely to enter civil services than Indian women and that there is a dearth of representation of Pakistani women in corporate setup though I doubt it is because of prevailing religion.
uh, are you kidding me? Just filter the blog entries by author ‘Kabir’ and majority of recycled hitjobs that are India or Hindu-focused will be there to see.
We all remember the post you made where you reproduced the video clip of a Baloch politician calling for secession.
Claiming the moral high ground now is a stretch.
Look in a mirror and see how you have contributed to the hostility on here. An honest assessment would involve the realization that you’re not innocent. I’m not holding my breath.
“majority of recycled hitjobs will be there to see”– this is not even a grammatical sentence. You’re really slipping.
.
Yes, the analogy with ISIS was bizarre.
This is not a serious argument and it’s actually really Islamophobic.
Don’t think anyone here actually brought up ISIS. That’s an extrapolation from Calvin’s personal experience and at best a strawman. Quite literally essentializing the Saffroniate’s positions here – something he is quick to call out when done to Crescentiate or Islam.
This is literally a reference to ISIS.
Please point out the factual inaccuracy in the above statement.
Don’t be disingenuous.
Making an analogy between commenters here and ISIS is offensive and Islamophobic.
All hell breaks loose on this forum when I point out that the RSS was influenced by European fascism.
“Please point out the factual inaccuracy in the above statement”
I have not essentialized any position of the saffroniate here but talking of a general observation.
Most content of social reform in India focuses on lack social reform amongst Muslims, and whataboutery regarding muslims is quite literally the first response anytime issues in other communities( even my own) are brought up.
I have not done a deep dive into what this blog was talking about years ago but recently it is very clear issues within subcontinental muslims are what drives a lot of traffic
I have not essentialized any position of the saffroniate here but talking of a general observation.
Potayto, potahto! Almost every conversation at a macro level is about general observations. By that token, it is not an incorrect “general observation” to assert that perpetrators in cases like TCS, Ajmer or Chhangur Baba are all from the same religion and that’s the only element of commonality amongst them.
Most content of social reform in India focuses on lack social reform amongst Muslims, and whataboutery regarding muslims is quite literally the first response anytime issues in other communities( even my own) are brought up.
What’s wrong with that? No person/community/nation is an island. If all other communities could reform to somewhat modern standards then why shouldn’t the Muslims of India be expected to do the same? Reform can’t be a one way street. Regressive policies, when practiced right next door, are a threat to progress everywhere. Perhaps you forget that Hindutva gained currency inter alia because BJP could say point to Islam’s entrenched social ills not even being a point of conversation while reform was pushed down the throat of Hindu community. This is one of the biggest reasons the hard Left is losing ground across India rapidly.
P.S.: Not against reform being pushed down per se but every community must carry its weight equally.
//What’s wrong with that? No person/community/nation is an island. If all other communities could reform to somewhat modern standards then why shouldn’t the Muslims of India be expected to do the same? Reform can’t be a one way street. Regressive policies, when practiced right next door, are a threat to progress everywhere. Perhaps you forget that Hindutva gained currency inter alia because BJP could say point to Islam’s entrenched social ills not even being a point of conversation while reform was pushed down the throat of Hindu community. //
What’s wrong is not only does this fail to bring about reforms among muslims, or make them self introspect it ultimately pegs the standard of values at by far the worst of muslims across time and space.
It is not even that you cant criticizer muslims, our mainstream and social media cant shut up about muslims and various organizations have sprung up whose whole reason for existence is bad mouthing muslims.
What’s worse is thst while scope for criticising muskims has increased thst for other religions has decreased and is justified by ignoring the above that I have mentioned
//This is one of the biggest reasons the hard Left is losing ground across India rapidly.//
This is not the fault of regressive muslims, it is the fault of lack of imagination of the left and skewed priorities in general.
What’s wrong is not only does this fail to bring about reforms among muslims, or make them self introspect it ultimately pegs the standard of values at by far the worst of muslims across time and space.
So what’s your solution? Let them stay backward and regressive as the policy of the Indian state has been since 1947? Where is that going to lead us?
What’s worse is thst while scope for criticising muskims has increased thst for other religions has decreased and is justified by ignoring the above that I have mentioned
This is objectively not true. Even the ruling party and RSS cannot stop talking about casteism being the biggest problem of Hindu culture. Hence the push to deify and appropriate Ambedkar. Might I remind you, a BJP leader still has to stay under high level security lest she be beheaded for stating a well known fact while Muslim leaders who’ve made even more offensive remarks roam as free men.
//So what’s your solution? Let them stay backward and regressive as the policy of the Indian state has been since 1947? Where is that going to lead us?//
Has it ever occured to you that Muslims dont matter? That focusing on improving the living standards and making an equitable life, something that present discourse has no place for will automatically reduce the power of mullahs and make muslims come out of their cocoons. Even if muslims dont come out of their cocoons, their own leaders dont have anything more than nuisance value that a decent police can deal with? Tldr: Strenghten institution, many problems will automatically be solved if our institution worked half as well as they can.
//This is objectively not true. Even the ruling party and RSS cannot stop talking about casteism being the biggest problem of Hindu culture. Hence the push to deify and appropriate Ambedkar. Might I remind you, a BJP leader still has to stay under high level security lest she be beheaded for stating a well known fact while Muslim leaders who’ve made even more offensive remarks roam as free men.//
The RSS says a lot of things and its affiliates that drive the agenda on the ground and in the media say a lot more, much of it is directed towards other communities and how bad they are, and how they need to be handled in some way or the other. In the meanwhile, important conversations on income inequality, caste based violence, better standard of living all get pushed out in favour of putting certain people in their place.
People who have murdered rationalists have gotten bail, many organizations whose whole purpose is badmouthing and instigating violence against a community and of course people like T Raja Singh and Yati Narshinghannad also roam free. If I did not know any better there is a culture problem that rewards violence and violent rhetoric that is not specific to one community.
I hope you can see how the presence of the above has not made Nupur Sharma safer, if anything, like an orouboros they feed into each other.
Has it ever occured to you that Muslims dont matter?
Are you seriously suggesting that the behaviour and social mores of 1 in almost 5 Indians, 250 million people, a nation bigger than Pakistan can just be conveniently ignored? Institutions cannot be built in vacuum; they’re built to address specific societal/economic/political problems which are usually a factor of the same population that they’re built to govern. At the same time, the same population that you would rather ignore, will continue to interact and undermine the same institutions that you are trying to strengthen. An institution that is compromised by one group’s interest is compromised for everyone and leads to rot.
I know people of a certain persuasion like to draw analogies between the Hindu and Muslim behaviour but as has been called out here before, Hindu problematic behaviour has almost always and entirely been reactionary.
A possible way out of this rut would be to go the Singapore way where for e.g., race riots were out of control because policemen wouldn’t take action against people of their own race so they formed a tactical unit of Gorkhas as neutral third parties to control. Or, the strictly enforced rules to ensure public housing reflects the broad demographics of the country to ensure no ghettoization. 1 generation on, Singaporeans are some of the most law abiding people in the world, comparable to Japanese society. Of course, these policies need an ultra authoritarian govt which India could never have but I am only trying to highlight that solutions are not to bury your head in the sand but to grab the bull by the horns, something the Indian state has shied away from far more than even Muslim states.
People who have murdered rationalists have gotten bail,
And you see enough and more backlash from within Hindu society, rightly so. Ideally there should be criticism from the Hindutva wing as well but with partisanship from the other side, that’s not a very reasonable expectation.
P.S.: Also I recall you’ve previously called out that the law only holds Muslim perpetrators to account but technically speaking, they are accused on trial in the Gowri Lankesh murder case. FWIW, I am fully for an Indian state where the investigation and trial are fair and fast, and punishment strict.
//P.S.: Also I recall you’ve previously called out that the law only holds Muslim perpetrators to account but technically speaking, they are accused on trial in the Gowri Lankesh murder case. FWIW, I am fully for an Indian state where the investigation and trial are fair and fast, and punishment strict.//
The killers of Gauri Lankesh are out on bail and recieved a heros welcome, the killers of Kanhaiya Lal are still in jail and ignored by their own community. This is not a backlash that can be blamed on muslims, and you so causally ignore it as a case of reaction due to muslims, proving my point exactly, this kind of discourse neither makes muslims better nor does it help other communities just making them worse versions of themselves.
//Are you seriously suggesting that the behaviour and social mores of 1 in almost 5 Indians, 250 million people, a nation bigger than Pakistan can just be conveniently ignored? Institutions cannot be built in vacuum; they’re built to address specific societal/economic/political problems which are usually a factor of the same population that they’re built to govern. At the same time, the same population that you would rather ignore, will continue to interact and undermine the same institutions that you are trying to strengthen. An institution that is compromised by one group’s interest is compromised for everyone and leads to rot.//
It is not muslims who are running our instutions, not their bigoted narratives that are spread with fact check on our national media nor do they, like Yati Narsinghanad get called to give speeches at our press clubs, you spend so much focus on muslims, ignoring that most of them are not only nobodies, but nobodies whose leadership will ignore with some SOPs and whom the police and many other organizations can easily deal with. The muslims are a manageable problem, that others use to justify their own dirty laundry in different ways, it was first secularist and liberal hindus who used them and now it is others who use them. You legitimatelty believe our institutions are weakened due to muslims when they are not even the majority of it and largely outside of it, please think clearly on what has the presence of anti muslim organizations achieved, has it made our institutions stronger, better, more robust or weakend them more while not even solving the problem they were initially made for.
//A possible way out of this rut would be to go the Singapore way where for e.g., race riots were out of control because policemen wouldn’t take action against people of their own race so they formed a tactical unit of Gorkhas as neutral third parties to control. Or, the strictly enforced rules to ensure public housing reflects the broad demographics of the country to ensure no ghettoization.//
These are great ideas but it is not muslims who are against this, at least they are not the only ones or even the most influential ones pushing ghettoization. You say that we have never had an authoritarian govt, I disagree many of our govt have been authoritarian, our country would not have had laws like AFSPA or dropped bombs on militants in Mizoram or dealt with naxalite and other insurgencies without authoritarinism, it is just that this authoritarianism has never been applied equally to all locally dominant communities that act out of place whatever their religion.
//I know people of a certain persuasion like to draw analogies between the Hindu and Muslim behaviour but as has been called out here before, Hindu problematic behaviour has almost always and entirely been reactionary.//
You continue doing this action-reaction nonsense, not only will it solve the primary problems in muslim society that may have created it, but it will import it elsewhere too
I am not burying my head in the sand, but those who use bad behaviour of others to justify their own, the same cant be said about them.
You are mistaking cultural Hindus with political Hindus.
What you encounter here and elsewhere are political Hindus.
Cultural Hindus just about all Hindus who dont follow exact tenets of any Hindu Darshana _ a lot of them are “L”iberals.
Political Hindu is just a person who identifies and defends Hindus causes { you can term it as Hindutvavadi though that term has gotten a specific meaning}
Ok, though I dont think this is actually meaningful though, everyone is political though and this notion of people being completely apolotical and not thinking about politics is inaccurate.
I also dont think many of the hindus you descibe as non political would disagree too much with whatever political hindus say or behave any different when encountering the crescentiate here.
Well a lot of Hindus still vote for non BJP parties even in polarized elections.
And no a lot of people are apolitical. A very large number indeed. Among all communities. They may have their biases but they haven’t thought through many of the things discussed here or even in news.
Wrt Pakistanis ^ even a lot of Congress voting Hindus feel the same as Hindutvavadis. There is a lot of anger and now fatigue with Pakistan {if that’s what u meant by Cresendiate}. Viz Indian Muslims the attitudes are more varied i assure you
Is voting for BJP a signifier of being a political hindu?
Many of the topics they pick up, particularly revolving muslims are shared by vast sections of society the only thing is that it may be less relevant to their immediate survival or they may not buy the notion that only they can solve the issues raised. It does not mean they are apolitical, no one is apolitical, one just does not know how much influence politics has on your life.
Crescentiate is the word used to describe the Pakistani nationalists here, or was it just the crescent, even the apolitical hindus would say the same things that the saffroniate( or nationalist Indians) say.
I dont think we should pre suppose some sort of familiarity due to Islam, as many muslims not only think partition was a mistake but the more well read among them would know that Pakistan and to a lesser extent bangladesh are a reason for many trouble they face.
Yes. That precisely is definition of a Political Hindu.
Your argument reminds me of Modis reply when asked _ are you a Hindu nationalist.
Modi replied. Yes I am a Hindu and a nationalist so I am a Hindu nationalist.
But we know a Hindu nationalist or Hindutvavdi or political Hindu means specific thing and not merely a Hindu who is political.
Have you heard any apolitical hindu say these things ? In person
Because I do have a lot of such conversations with Hindus of varying political orientations.
Just curious ^ this isn’t a rhetoric Q.
//Have you heard any apolitical hindu say these things ? In person//
Never had anyone say anything positive about Pakistan and antipathy towards muslims is quite common. My own family members also reproduce anti muslim views so this is not something unique to only one religion.
They may not call themselves a Hindu nationalist but if you put most of their rhetoric in front of them, without any deep knowledge, one would find a large agreement on a lot of its talking points not only among hindus but even other religions as long as their religion is not spoken about.
This is noteworthy, especially to those not familiar, attitudes towards muslims are often class and ethnicity-based. Certain christians have the same critiques as savarna hindus, jains and sikhs , especially in so far as they are urban middle class. A lot of “hindu” politics is middle class angst.
The rise of the BJP and the middle class post-liberalization is not coincidental. When a right winger wants to compliment a muslim, they comment on how they’ve adhered to middle class sensibilities, having a certain standard of education for both parents, english fluency, being open to modest family socializing, and no overt religious identification markers. Then its “don’t worry, they’re just like us”.
lovely posts Gaurav – we’ll substantively engage..
[…] the kind that can only happen in a forum that has paid for its openness. Kabir, to his credit, has imposed the hard internal checks that keep the blog from collapsing into the views of its […]