I find it…..amusing that disagreeing with Calvin on reservations and the cockroach protest drama somehow paints me as a ‘conservative’. Oh the fiery disagreements I have had with conservatives over the years. 😀
I hope you are just joking when you say you are a little worried..it can get heated but i can speak for myself and assure you it wont go out of hand from my side..
lol, my…..spirited arguments have ‘aimed’ at a whole spectrum of commenters on BP, no? From yourself to Agni, to Calvin to…..others :).
Anyway, just razzing you a bit. Its all good. I am fully on board with having BP comments be spaces free of…..unappetizing personal rancor. Debate and disagreement does not need to turn toxic. We all can do our part.
on the subject of team names….I would gladly embrace a team of a desi Deng Xiaoping. But alas none such exists, and I have to settle for grudgingly supporting the Moooooodi in the interim.
A Desi Deng would’ve sent tanks into the protests. I am personally glad to a have a Modi instead. The support for Modi in our country is done hesitatingly by the RW and then people complain why Modi isn’t more forthright in his actions. If Modi had been more explicitly supported we might’ve had the land acquisition bill by now but alas such is the self-defeating nature of the Indian RW.
A flavour of Deng isn’t bad imo. Indians need a strong legislative stick to obey basic rules in India. Amazing how they obey rules abroad like quiet little mice.
If your arguments always coincidentally support the ruling party even when it is based on narratives they themselves dont believe in and there is a clear difference between how you treat its opponents and the ruling party itself you should own upto.your mantle as a conservative.
lol, you are free to believe whatever floats your boat on my personal beliefs.
The tribal fetish that Lelis have to forcibly bucket anyone who disagrees with them as a ‘Bhakt’ etc, is yawningly typical. Its not a bug, its a feature.
//The tribal fetish that Lelis have to forcibly bucket anyone who disagrees with them as a ‘Bhakt’ etc, is yawningly typical. Its not a bug, its a feature.//
You should read your own response trying to forefit my views into caricatures you saw elsewhere. Including this one.
It is funny you love to put other people in boxes but get angry when the same is done to you? So much projection.
“Team P has Calvin has captain with K & Q as his sides; ”
Umm… are K and Q here references to Kabir and Qureishi? In what world are flag bearing Islamic nationalists who see nothing wrong with their own state shooting dead their people like fish in a barrel, Progressives?
Lets be real, in this definition, P is just code for Islamo-Fascism masquerading as as a counter to Dharmic self-expression. This framing is even less accurate and I’d argue more inflammatory than C v. S.
Nothing wrong with conservatism per se. I just cannot see how you group someone who questions every policy of a an elected govt in a highly diverse, constitutional democracy to statists who take up cudgels on behalf of a junta that has no qualms massacring the same people on whose behalf it has waged 4 wars and shed the blood of thousands of innocents.
Fwiw, at least Saffroniate v Crescentiate is more descriptive, if not accurate. Calvin has defended India’s policies vis-a-vis Pakistan (although I cannot speak for him). The Saffroniate descriptor is itself misleading – any self-respecting Indian would support their country vis-a-vis Pakistan. That doesn’t make them a BJP cheerleader. You are actually falling in to the trap laid by Pak propaganda that any criticism from India must necessarily be driven by some Hindu nationalist agenda.
Thank you. Work’s been keeping me super busy. Hoping to get back and engage more substantively soon. Not sure if there are any lawyers/policy professionals here but Calvin’s comments on the SC/ST Act and the whole NEET paper leak saga make me think the readership may benefit from an introduction to Ashworth’s views on overcriminalization.
Because the Indian Right Wing project is inherently progressive in comparison to any regionalist project. No other side will ever speak of the rights of LGBT folks in the subcontinent yet we act as though they are conserving some previous order which never existed. The reality is the Indian RW is a reformist and progressive movement rather than a conservative movement.
I think XTM was using terminology that’s used in the UK 🙂
Agree with your point, though the more conservative RW trads aren’t progressive so to speak. As Fly Die says, don’t really identify exclusively with one or another, it depends upon the topic at hand.
I am pretty progressive, but progress for the sake of progress must be discouraged. Let us preserve what must be preserved, perfect what can be perfected, and prune practices that ought to be prohibited
“I am Progressive on all issues. Women’s rights, LGBT rights etc ”
I believe you are Kabir and you have always provided context vis-a-vis Pakistan whenever you commented on these issues…just fyi I do not agree with Calvin’s broad brush tarring of you vis-a-vis these subjects..
he didn’t need to accept your Olive Branch but neither should he trample over it.
BP has improved significantly as a community in the last year since the Common Courtesy standard has emerged (disagree as much as you like but be polite).
it was not polite; you have not been around for nearly a year, it’s not nice to sour the tone or welcome.
Admin Note: 20 comment deletion of Kabir for being ungracious towards Indosaurus upon his return.
Even if Kabir didn’t want to accept the Olive Branch, he needn’t have trampled all over it.
Please don’t litigate this Kabir or it will be another 20 comment deletion. If comment deletions don’t work then we will have to trial a temporary pause, which is not my intention.
But no single individual (even myself) is above the Brown Pundits Community. We must all be collegiate with one another even if we disagree with one another.
No one who defends an army the way they do or demeans women the Q does is a progressive. This framing itself is entirely wrong.
Most of the people here are not conservative they just have linked their honor with weird things,and have clear favorites amongst the politicsl party’s in India even if some deny it
The difference is between those who do firefighting or argue from a place of honor primarily and those who dont.
still waiting on your mea culpa on your wrong assertion on “gurukul” funding.
You made a tall claim, and all sorts of extrapolated assumptions of what ‘media’ I consume – and a cursory look exposed the lack of factual basis. I see that you have simply chosen to move on and ‘forget’ it, and now are back to hurling strawmen at me.
On an unrelated note..I have a suggestion for an open thread – Mohsin Naqvi’s latest speech at the Pakistan economic summit where he says Pakistan has become ungovernable and needs a complete overhaul…surely he wont be speaking out of turn given that he serves at the mercy of the army..Something is brewing in the neighbourhood and maybe worth an open thread discussion..
I think this is happening. People speaking out against it are quickly doing a volte face and endorsing it.
I have no context on how great this is as an idea, but given Pakistans population increase over 80 years, some reorg might be due.
Yes population explosion is a huge issue for Pakistan, even though TFR has come down from 6 in the early 90s to 3.5 today ( For context, Bihar TFR is 2.8 ). Maybe that is another motivation for this speech. Pakistan is the youngest country in the subcontinent ( Average age is 21 )..India is 29 and even Nepal is 26 years avg age..
He did refer to potential cockroaches in their society overthrowing the administration
Was it Prosaic? Didn’t he say Pakistan has become ungovernable…there is only one man who is going around the world getting concessions and fame for Pakistan without crossing any redline…so sort this out in 6 months? red line is a coup and 6 months sounds like a notice period for the civilian admin…
So he just shot from the hip?…Surprising and reckless then given he has held significant positions in past and now – CM of Punjab and chairman of PCB, interior minister, and now ACC chairman 🙂
I feel there should be 2 teams.
Those that like to be identified with labels and those that don’t.
I would have pigeonholed everybody here, but that would reveal my team.
the 2 party system at BP (with broad neutrals) allows for very effective moderation.
a tight moderation, which also allows for the maximum possible range of views (within the law and common decency), is how BP can help in decolonisation.
otherwise moderating everyone on an individual basis would become overwhelming.
a thousand flowers are blooming even if there are only a few schools of thought..
still triggered by Serge Jordan and his moralising on the Great Mahatma.
You don’t know me so I don’t think you should indulge in diagnosing my politics.
I am a center-left Pakistani-American. I am so center-left that I voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 US Democratic primaries.
Outside of issues concerning Pakistan, I am a generic center-left American millennial. I spent all my formative years in the US and received all my education there.
Yes, I support the Pakistan Army. Unfortunately, Pakistan exists in a hostile neighborhood. We are a national security state. The Army is the one institution defending Pakistan from hostile neighbors.
Many members of my extended family (on my mother’s side) have served in Pak Fauj,
The Indians here defend the Indian Army right? Does that negate their progressive credentials?
On a more general note, I think the whole concept of “teams” is problematic. It lead to people stereotyping each other and being at each other’s throats. That was the issue with “Saffroniate” etc.
I think my issue is more generally with the whole idea of “teams”. I think it flattens people’s views.
We saw that with the whole “Saffroniate vs. Crescentiate”. I don’t think relabeling it as “Progressives vs. Conservatives” is going to solve that particular problem.
I have no issues with Calvin. Outside of the India-Pakistan issue, I think we would probably agree on most things. I’m a Pakistani nationalist. I have no problem admitting that.
Also, I don’t think I’m on the same team as Q. I don’t support his views on gender for example. I tend not to disagree with him much here because I don’t make a habit of disagreeing with my fellow Pakistanis in public.
If this had been a Pakistani blog, I would have been going after Q much more harshly.
Agree. Again quoting Fly Die (he’s not been active for awhile), I think most people are centrist with more strong opinions on topics they feel deeply about. The patriarchy debate was instructive on social conservatism vs liberalism with the religious angle to boot.
However, I think the current framing of “teams” is more from a political affiliation perspective.
Plenty of immigrants are ‘liberal and progressive’ in the US where their rights are under threat and conservative in their home country.
With respect to Pakistan you are a clear supporter of the status quo as shown with your support of the army. If the army rules against say supporting Hindustani music hypothetically your own love for the culture will not lead to criticize them especially it this decision is dressed up in nationalism.
Since we are not talking about the US but the subcontinent, I consider you to be a conservative rather thsn a progressive no matter your voting choices.
I don’t think anyone on this blog is in a position to hand out certificates of “progressiveness” to anyone else. This is why the whole idea of “teams” is inherently problematic.
I am a center-left Pakistani-American. I have written extensively about what being center-left means to me.
I support women’s rights, LGBT rights etc. I am not by any means “conservative”.
Support for one’s army doesn’t inherently negate someone’s progressiveness. Are you seriously going to claim that supporters of the Congress Party don’t support the Indian Army?
By the way, I am not 100% uncritical of Pak Fauj. I have never supported the abrogation of Pakistan’s Constitution through direct military coups. In fact, General Musharraf’s removal of Mian Sahab is one of the first news events I recall.
Pakistan’s existence…..is not under the threat that you seem to think it is. And most if not all Indians aren’t really in the business of disputing it. I’m certainly not.
As far as my …discussions with Calvin goes, if you notice, our debates have gotten quite contentious with fierce disagreement without resorting to personal attacks 🙂
He is free to make assumptions about my political leanings, and I am free to dispute it. The same applies to you.
The existence of the Islamic Republic is justified by TNT. TNT is not “extremism”. It is the mainstream position and the very basis of the nation’s existence.
TNT is by definition based on religion based apartheid logic. You are free to worship it as whatever you see fit. Demanding that others ‘see it the way you do’ is….unrealistic.
“Apartheid” is an offensive word. We’ve been over this multiple times.
Just as an analogy: Zionism is the basis of Israeli nationalism. Would you constantly tell an Israeli how terrible you think Zionism is? If not, then why do you think you can constantly tell a Pakistani that TNT is “extremism”.
TNT is the basis of Pakistani nationalism. Without it, we would be part of an Indian nation-state which would be Hindu majority. You can see why that outcome would be absolute anathema to the vast majority of Pakistanis.
Without TNT, there would be no Bangladesh either. I’m sure the vast majority of Bangladeshis also wouldn’t want to be part of a Hindu majority country.
You are entitled to whatever views you want to hold on TNT. But it is very disrespectful to insult it in front of Pakistanis.
As I’ve said before, at bottom your issue is that a section of the Muslims of British India made the decision to rule ourselves in territory in which we were demographically the majority.
Apartheid is technically not correct either in Pakistan’s case. Minorities can live anywhere but probably have glass ceilings (but depends on which minority, feels more like a class thing).
I think he is referring to the fact that a non-Muslim cannot be Prime Minister, President, Army Chief etc.
Anyway, “apartheid” is a loaded and offensive term.
The larger point is that if one would not tell an Israeli to their face that Zionism is “extremism” or whatever, then one should not tell a Pakistani to his face that TNT is “extremism”. This comes under basic respect.
If Israel has the right to exist than so does Pakistan.
Since you don’t want to us to repeatedly litigate TNT, I’ll leave it here.
Without TNT a Pakistani is no different from an Indian Muslim and there is no basis for the existence of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Pakistan has geographic coherence and culturally only bleeds into India strongly in northern/central punjab. There is no danger of being reabsorbed, even if the TNT loses all credibility. Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka all have overlapping cultural zones with India, and with more hindus too, but they have robust, independent political identities.
“There is no danger of being reabsorbed”– Pakistan is a nuclear power of 255 million people. It’s obviously not going to be “reabsorbed”.
We were never part of “India”. We were part of British India which was a colony. The nation-states of “India” and “Pakistan” were created at the exact same moment.
However, what you and others on this forum don’t understand is that Pakistan is an ideological state. The ideology of Pakistan is the TNT.
Without it we are absolutely nothing. We may as well not exist as a nation-state.
I think different people are being held to different standards of politeness. But I’ll leave it there.
The problem with “courtesy” is that’s a very vague term. Maybe it needs to be defined explicitly.
As for “blasphemy” my point is that if the Prophet of God is allowed to be insulted than so are gods of any other religion. I don’t think you want to go in that direction.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean the right to insult religion. That falls under “courtesy” surely?
Kabir, with respect, ever since I’ve been tighter on you (particularly), all of the Flame Threads have dissipated.
I think you conflate a lot of Principles with also personal behaviour.
With the exception of say RNJ & 0M, who like to tumble with you, there is virtually no other moderation on this blog (whether Q, Calvin, Agni or any of the rest).
I’m simply giving this for your edification but I think prior to the Gender Precedent Partition; I’d be very sensitive to this idea that the blog is inherently biased, when it’s really not.
I do agree that there is a tilt but it is not significant (I’d meditated on this that if Calvin had been an Indian Muslim, I’d probably have scanned his writing for anti-nationalism etc but then the Muslims of undivided India did kind of agitate to split into multiple nations whereas every other religious minorities seems pretty content with their natio states).
So it is a balancing act but yes we can discuss ideas with light and not heat. I have no problem with discussing religion, respectfully, but it also feels like a “masala topic” rather than a substantive one.
//I’d meditated on this that if Calvin had been an Indian Muslim, I’d probably have scanned his writing for anti-nationalism etc but then the Muslims of undivided India did kind of agitate to split into multiple nations whereas every other religious minorities seems pretty content with their natio states//
Why would be so distrustful of an Indian muslim if they are here. Many of the things Indian muslims do, are things other communities do as well but is treated differently. Why reflexively think that Indian muslim being critical of RW talking points is a sign of anti nationalism?
Most muslims in India consider partition a bad thing and are deacendat of those who did not have the right to vote on it and have been bearing the brunt of animosity due to it.
However the Kabir perspective is there; they are liberal when they need to be and conservative otherwise.
So India *must* remain secular but Pakistan needn’t.
Calvin you do benefit from Christian privilege in the sense you are not scanned for anti-nationalism.
If DP, whose Facebook post I quoted, had been Muslim or Muslim-names, I would have never quoted him. So yes there is definitely a cost to Partition.
The Hindufication of India is a foregone event; let’s not forget Christians ordinarily carry Hindu names, are very idol-adjacent (the Shrines are made in the local template) and consider themselves very much Indian. Also the dominant Western hegemon they are aligned to is also favoured by Hindutva.
There is still a ton of educational privilege, which like reservations disproportionately affects the lower class upper caste hard working kid, but thats secondary.
Muslims stand apart, proudly, in almost every way. That is their right but then that comes at the cost that they must be circumspect in certain matters.
//However the Kabir perspective is there; they are liberal when they need to be and conservative otherwise. //
This is something all communities do, they act liberal and conservative depending on what benefits, this is most apparent in the diaspora. But we can see echoes of this even in India, one example is many agriculatural castes simultaneously want to see themselves as downtrodden and poor and descendants of kings of yore. Nothing new and spectacular, I dont know why Muslims doing this is something strange.
//So India *must* remain secular but Pakistan needn’t.//
I dont think any Indian muslim will say Pakistan should not become more secular, dont know why exactly do you seem to impose pakistani muslim viewpoints on Indian muslims who obviously will disagree very much with Kabir on this matter.
//Muslims stand apart, proudly, in almost every way. That is their right but then that comes at the cost that they must be circumspect in certain matters.
There is still a ton of educational privilege, which like reservations disproportionately affects the lower class upper caste hard working kid, but thats secondary.//
Since apparently my comments are too long, let me end this by saying, that considering people anti national due to them being critical of some socio-political is lazy argumentation, especially when there are forces in society inimical towards them for things they are not responsible for.
I also disagree that the Indian muslims wants to be seperate in many matters and are much closely aligned to Indian cultural and philosophical tenets, just not ones that are very sanskritic in nature. Finally reservation and article 25 of the constitution dont penalize poor general category people, failure of government to make good quality education does.
of course they consider partition a bad thing because they now realize that with ~35% of population they would have been “kings” and not just kingmakers that they were pre-2014. Look at the muslim votes in the 1946 elections.
To add, as India progresses, the IM sees a stable future here, not with their cousins across the border. In no other non-Muslim state do they have so much veto power or rights to boot despite the perennial victim card play they indulge in.
Most muslims in India consider partition a bad thing
Why they oppose partition is perhaps worth investigating as well? I fear you will find the cause to be more aligned with Maulana Maududi than Mahatma G.
The problem is that the British really soured the milk. This is their MO; they never planned for their departure over decades.
I was reading on the territorial make up of the current Indian subcontinent; an easy case for 70-100 states in the whole region (Pakistan alone is 10-15).
Also the “British” cities should have been Federalised.
All I’m saying is that “courtesy” needs to be defined explicitly. Otherwise what happens is that any views one doesn’t like get branded “discourteous”.
I was thinking specifically of RNJ and OM. Constantly questioning my center-left credentials and using words like “kleptocracy” and “apartheid” is surely discourteous?
There is obviously a bias in the sense that the only regular commenters who are Muslim also happen to be Pakistani. So it is a space where the worldview is basically that of the center-right Indian Hindu (and I’m being polite here).
I do find the idea of you scanning a hypothetical Indian Muslim’s writing for “anti-nationalism” problematic.
Also, just to throw this out there but perhaps one reason the flame threads have dissipated is that BB is no longer here.
Yes, for clarity, I don’t suggest that Pakistan’s independence is at the mercy of India or that it is a breakaway from it. The task of occupying any of the smaller countries , nepal or SL would also be beyond capability as well.
My point is that without TNT there is no basis for Pakistan’s existence. We are otherwise just North Indian Muslims.
Just as Israel is an ideological state, so is Pakistan.
If there were an “ideology of India” or “idea of India” (in Khilnani’s terms) it was Congress nationalism. Obviously that idea doesn’t hold so much anymore.
But the Indian Army is not the guardian of India’s ideology the way Pak Fauj is of TNT.
The army as you have mentioned in many threads is the leader of Pakistan, it is not elected, not accountable and frankly manipulates Pakistans foregin policy for its own benefits.
You maybe liberal-progressive wrt to US but not it is difficult to square with such uncritical support of the army.
I dont agree with many things the army does, but dont defend it
On Truschke, I think that one should attend this event and then judge it rather than just rejecting it because one doesn’t like her. Or just admit that you are not the target audience.
This is a diaspora group based in Washington DC that I believe is mostly made up of Indian Muslims. Thus, it’s not a surprise that they are pro Mughal and pro Truschke.
**Just as BP is pro Hindu Right (I’m actually surprised by people openly admitting that they are pro-Savarkar vs. pro-Gandhi), this diaspora group is pro-Muslim. That’s fair no?***
Why surprise? I think I’ve been pretty open about my dislike for Gandhi’s politics and Nehruvian socialism?
It’s quite weird to me that someone whose ideology is responsible for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi can be rehabilitated.
My thesis is that most Indians of the majority faith really just dislike their fellow citizens of minority faiths. Either that or they finally feel free to state views that they have held all along.
In most countries one has to revere the founding fathers. I’m most familiar with the US. I don’t think anyone mainstream can say nasty things about George Washington or Thomas Jefferson.
Certainly, in Pakistan, it is not done to speak against the Quaid (though Hoodbhoy does so)
I’ve always been very pro Gandhi. I remember being quite upset when I read Arundhati Roy’s “The Doctor and the Saint”.
GW is generally not reviled. Jefferson is, quite often, about slave ownership, some of whom were his children.
Nathuram Godse is also not as reviled as you might think. His speech in his own defence in court was excellent and moved the judge to say, that if it were a jury trial, he would have been freed.
You can have your thesis, I don’t believe we can prevail upon you to change a made up mind. If anything I am possibly giving you more data points.
Sarvarkar, Godse, Gandhi, they were all men of very strong principles, maybe opposing views, but I believe they were very sincere in their causes. Godse, of course chose murder, there is no rehabilitating that, he expected to be dammed for the ages for it, and rightly so.
>Who has ever argued that the 9/11 attackers weren’t influenced by Islamic extremism? That’s not a serious argument.
But you wouldn’t assert that the entirety of the Koran is ‘extremism’ right? And yet somehow when it comes to the RSS, you are quick to extrapolate in that fashion.
I am happy to mock the RSS and some of its positions, criticize them, but am merely pointing out that some of the ‘cancel’ rhetoric that’s hurled against them does not pass the credulity test.
My point was limited to drawing the parallel regarding ‘ideological influence’. I do not wish to get into critiquing religious texts or religion – especially when I am not well-informed on them. And honestly, I don’t want to be a jerk about it, at a minimum.
Using Godse and ‘inspired by Nazis’ are tired, flawed talking points that have been weaponized against the RSS – who by no means are above harsh criticism btw..
I just wish the criticism was more honest instead of peddling half-truths.
That is because the Quran lifts large portions of its text from the Christian Bible. To then localize the bible for the Arabs it adds several rules to interpret it.
Do it. I am a nastik. I wouldn’t even care if you burned the Manu Smriti. I just hope you don’t STSJ when I cast aspersions on the Quran for being a rather derivative document which wouldn’t pass a plag check when it was created.
I’m fine with letting their religious views being rather irrational in private belief. Thats the nature of religious belief. But if these topics become part of public discussion some level of critique should be expected. If these topics are some kind of a “Holy Cow” for the other side perhaps they shouldn’t be a topic for discussion at all.
OK everyone, please let’s not go down this path again.
If I may, I don’t think either RNJ or OM are trying to be disrespectful. In general, Hindus are quite tolerant to questioning scripture, be it of any faith including their own. This enquiry comes from that thought process.
I’m……in slight agreement with you that folks should not hurl needlessly rude remarks about religions not their own. However, demanding that ..non-believers treat Quran as ‘word of God’ is….a bit of a reach.
The Church of Later Day Saints believe that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon from buried golden plates shown to him by an angel named Moroni. I have told Mormons that their god isn’t real to their faces before. I have done so to Muslims, Hindus, Catholics, and Protestant. The only Muslims person seem to have some kind of crisis in faith because of this is you.
Is it though? My understanding is that both the Bible and the Koran are the word of God as communicated by the Prophets (and presumably written down by someone else)
The 10 commandments are the word of the Abrahamic God, whereby God writes it personally upon 2 tablets.
That ‘word of’ is taking on the weight of creation. Large parts of the books aren’t God speaking though.
The difference is that Christians don’t believe that the Gospels were directly revealed by God. There are four Gospels and each is the perspective of one person (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John).
Muslims believe that each word of the Quran was divinely revealed by Allah.
It was really Patel who led the crackdown. At any rate, Savarkar, who I don’t particularly care for, was never a member of the RSS but the Hindu Mahasabha. Interestingly the latter was not banned.
Why? Why is it tired? What playbook? Also I clubbed Sarvarkar, Godse and Gandhi.
Sarvarkar, while ideologically important, the man himself seems to have had a more conciliatory side compared to the other 2.
It is Godse’s uncompromising nature that made him a sinner.
It is Gandhi’s uncompromising nature that made him a saint.
We (you and I) can admire and try to understand the men without condoning some actions whilst cheering others.
We aren’t school children in need of ideological indoctrination. As you can see, the playbooks nowadays are to attack Gandhi the man out of time, place and understanding.
Criticizing Jefferson about Sally Hemmings is not an example of being “nasty” about him. It’s a historical fact.
However, he was still an important founding father. He wrote the Declaration of Independence. Most Americans will speak of him with the utmost respect.
All founding fathers are human beings. They are neither God nor prophets. I have no issues with criticisms that are situated within a valid historical context.
This is my personal opinion, I strongly believe that nobody’s conduct should be above questioning. If anything, this deification of flawed human beings has resulted in some horrific abuse of the vulnerable. Not to mention, turning a blind eye to obvious exploitation by those who should uphold law and order to deliver justice.
Didn’t think you did? I guess it tied in more due to your surprise of Gandhi not being revered as much in India and Jinnah still seen through a reverential lens.
I was referring to a healthy critique of any human being be they religious or political figures. Anyone who exerts a substantial influence on the rest ought not to be deified imo. It helps prevent exploitation on the basis of religious or moral authority.
I’m glad to see objective critical assessments of any historical or religious figure.
History is …human. Its a sign of maturity if one is able to view historical figures in shades of grey instead of hagiography.
We can praise notable aspects of historical men and women while not airbrushing their flaws. I have gotten into some ‘heated discussions’ with some of my Bengali friends when I point out the ‘warts’ on Subhash Chandra Bose and his ….choices.
Weren’t all the founding fathers slave owners? They have to be seen in the context of their own times.
Anyway, I have already said that political leaders are not God or prophets. They can certainly be criticized while keeping the historical context in mind.
She has made Hinduphobic comments. Also Aligarh hosting her is a bit much.
All the white intellectuals (Dalyrymples, Truschke, the Gandhian author) all tend to romanticise the Muslim era, which incidentally the Brits demolished brick by brick.
Even if the Marathas and Sikhs had taken over; it would have been a much more hybrid culture.
Is she against Hindus as such or just Hindu nationalism? She has also received threats of violence against her which are unacceptable to give to any academic.
Anyway, the point is you’re not her target audience, which is fine. This particular diaspora group is mostly Indian Muslims. They are her target audience.
Jaded old Truschke trying to stay relevant lol.
good that the comments section is open.
there was a question in an earlier post by XTM as to who owns the mughal legacy. it is certainly the ashraff muslims of india and pakistan.
this evident in the brown faces on the pamplet.
with the so called seculars ceding political space to ‘hindus’, mughals might well become real historical.
even now people do not know auragzeb’s successor or even earlier rulers like balban(?).
reread the piece; aged quite well!
https://www.brownpundits.com/2025/12/08/on-the-question-…do-muslim-legacy/
Erm indeed.
welcome back 🙂
Welcome back Indo 😀
+1
Welcome back.
Hello x.t.m. It’s been a year? Close to, I think the last article I put out here was in Nov. Are you comfortable with me posting again?
Welcome back Indo (Thank you Agni). Apologies for the past misunderstanding and thank you for your return.
it would be nice if BB returned too and we became a broader tent.
BP has changed though; we don’t have a Crescentiate vs. Saffroniate split
It is Progressives versus Conservatives.
Team P has Calvin has captain with K & Q as his sides; S has RNJ with 0M-3 and Archer.. I am a little worried
just as an FYI; so we are putting out Flame Threads related to Indo-Pak.
It doesn’t mean we can’t have high value conversations on that topic; but it’s not the focus of the blog.
I find it…..amusing that disagreeing with Calvin on reservations and the cockroach protest drama somehow paints me as a ‘conservative’. Oh the fiery disagreements I have had with conservatives over the years. 😀
But its all good 🙂
please suggest your team name.
as long as Cresceniate and Saffroniate are avoided; it’s all good with me.
I hope you are just joking when you say you are a little worried..it can get heated but i can speak for myself and assure you it wont go out of hand from my side..
I don’t know why I wrote that in fact..
never has a comment of mine been so highly interrogated 🙂
but yes apologies I didn’t meant to write that.
lol ok..don’t want to contribute towards any stress for admins…please generously edit the occasional fly off the handle comments I might make 🙂
lol, my…..spirited arguments have ‘aimed’ at a whole spectrum of commenters on BP, no? From yourself to Agni, to Calvin to…..others :).
Anyway, just razzing you a bit. Its all good. I am fully on board with having BP comments be spaces free of…..unappetizing personal rancor. Debate and disagreement does not need to turn toxic. We all can do our part.
on the subject of team names….I would gladly embrace a team of a desi Deng Xiaoping. But alas none such exists, and I have to settle for grudgingly supporting the Moooooodi in the interim.
A Desi Deng would’ve sent tanks into the protests. I am personally glad to a have a Modi instead. The support for Modi in our country is done hesitatingly by the RW and then people complain why Modi isn’t more forthright in his actions. If Modi had been more explicitly supported we might’ve had the land acquisition bill by now but alas such is the self-defeating nature of the Indian RW.
A flavour of Deng isn’t bad imo. Indians need a strong legislative stick to obey basic rules in India. Amazing how they obey rules abroad like quiet little mice.
Touché
If your arguments always coincidentally support the ruling party even when it is based on narratives they themselves dont believe in and there is a clear difference between how you treat its opponents and the ruling party itself you should own upto.your mantle as a conservative.
lol, you are free to believe whatever floats your boat on my personal beliefs.
The tribal fetish that Lelis have to forcibly bucket anyone who disagrees with them as a ‘Bhakt’ etc, is yawningly typical. Its not a bug, its a feature.
//The tribal fetish that Lelis have to forcibly bucket anyone who disagrees with them as a ‘Bhakt’ etc, is yawningly typical. Its not a bug, its a feature.//
You should read your own response trying to forefit my views into caricatures you saw elsewhere. Including this one.
It is funny you love to put other people in boxes but get angry when the same is done to you? So much projection.
“Team P has Calvin has captain with K & Q as his sides; ”
Umm… are K and Q here references to Kabir and Qureishi? In what world are flag bearing Islamic nationalists who see nothing wrong with their own state shooting dead their people like fish in a barrel, Progressives?
Lets be real, in this definition, P is just code for Islamo-Fascism masquerading as as a counter to Dharmic self-expression. This framing is even less accurate and I’d argue more inflammatory than C v. S.
so how would you suggest the team names?
What’s wrong with conservatism anyway; most of Britain (like myself) is a small c conservative?
Nothing wrong with conservatism per se. I just cannot see how you group someone who questions every policy of a an elected govt in a highly diverse, constitutional democracy to statists who take up cudgels on behalf of a junta that has no qualms massacring the same people on whose behalf it has waged 4 wars and shed the blood of thousands of innocents.
Fwiw, at least Saffroniate v Crescentiate is more descriptive, if not accurate. Calvin has defended India’s policies vis-a-vis Pakistan (although I cannot speak for him). The Saffroniate descriptor is itself misleading – any self-respecting Indian would support their country vis-a-vis Pakistan. That doesn’t make them a BJP cheerleader. You are actually falling in to the trap laid by Pak propaganda that any criticism from India must necessarily be driven by some Hindu nationalist agenda.
you are right mea culpa
Left-Liberals captained by Calvin
Centre-Right captained by RNJ.
not a good look for us that Indosaurus gets to see so much fracas haha
Haha true…I think political affiliations across countries may differ…I too am broadly centre-right politically.
well said.
Please stick around. I enjoy reading yours and girmit’s comments. Even though I may not agree with all of them.
Thank you.
NdG it will be nice to see more of your inputs on different topics.
Thank you. Work’s been keeping me super busy. Hoping to get back and engage more substantively soon. Not sure if there are any lawyers/policy professionals here but Calvin’s comments on the SC/ST Act and the whole NEET paper leak saga make me think the readership may benefit from an introduction to Ashworth’s views on overcriminalization.
Interesting first I’ve learnt on this
Yes, that would be wonderful if you could do an informative post on that. I engage in the law / policy space in a collaborative manner.
Because the Indian Right Wing project is inherently progressive in comparison to any regionalist project. No other side will ever speak of the rights of LGBT folks in the subcontinent yet we act as though they are conserving some previous order which never existed. The reality is the Indian RW is a reformist and progressive movement rather than a conservative movement.
I think XTM was using terminology that’s used in the UK 🙂
Agree with your point, though the more conservative RW trads aren’t progressive so to speak. As Fly Die says, don’t really identify exclusively with one or another, it depends upon the topic at hand.
I am pretty progressive, but progress for the sake of progress must be discouraged. Let us preserve what must be preserved, perfect what can be perfected, and prune practices that ought to be prohibited
“I am Progressive on all issues. Women’s rights, LGBT rights etc ”
I believe you are Kabir and you have always provided context vis-a-vis Pakistan whenever you commented on these issues…just fyi I do not agree with Calvin’s broad brush tarring of you vis-a-vis these subjects..
yes apologies Kabir – Islamo-Fascism and I should have edited that out.
Hello Kabir, how have you been? Clean slate?
🙂 same old then. No hate from my side. I can’t adjust your filter though.
sorry about that Indosaurus.
it is poor form to trample on an Olive Branch.
if you cannot forgive then maybe worth revisiting your association with BP entirely?
Please, absolutely no stress from my side. I accept his response. No issues.
he didn’t need to accept your Olive Branch but neither should he trample over it.
BP has improved significantly as a community in the last year since the Common Courtesy standard has emerged (disagree as much as you like but be polite).
it was not polite; you have not been around for nearly a year, it’s not nice to sour the tone or welcome.
Thanks.
I don’t want to make a big issue about this. Don’t disrespect me or Pak Fauj and we should have no problems.
thank you
was there any passive aggression from Indosaurus to you:
Indosaurus
46 minutes ago
Reply to Kabir
Hello Kabir, how have you been? Clean slate?
Kabir, your response is disrespectful and unbecoming. You know that after the late and great Ruchira; I am trying to foster community here.
Calvin disagrees with virtually everyone here but is almost never disagreeable (same goes with Q).
Your response is not appropriate or becoming; also the Admin Team have a right to decide who participates in this blog.
No one is against ur advocacy of Pakistan but they do take exception to disagreeableness.
Admin Note: 20 comment deletion of Kabir for being ungracious towards Indosaurus upon his return.
Even if Kabir didn’t want to accept the Olive Branch, he needn’t have trampled all over it.
Please don’t litigate this Kabir or it will be another 20 comment deletion. If comment deletions don’t work then we will have to trial a temporary pause, which is not my intention.
But no single individual (even myself) is above the Brown Pundits Community. We must all be collegiate with one another even if we disagree with one another.
Kabir and Qureshi are not progressive.
No one who defends an army the way they do or demeans women the Q does is a progressive. This framing itself is entirely wrong.
Most of the people here are not conservative they just have linked their honor with weird things,and have clear favorites amongst the politicsl party’s in India even if some deny it
The difference is between those who do firefighting or argue from a place of honor primarily and those who dont.
Lol..everybody is flawed except you…
Surely, Calvin is allowed to clarify his team?
sure he is, but his ….protestations are more on tarring his targets than feathering his…team. 🙂
I am just following the example of everyone else here.
If you can pontificate and make caricatured statements on others I can at least make observations based on the responses I get.
I think we all…..pontificate 🙂
still waiting on your mea culpa on your wrong assertion on “gurukul” funding.
You made a tall claim, and all sorts of extrapolated assumptions of what ‘media’ I consume – and a cursory look exposed the lack of factual basis. I see that you have simply chosen to move on and ‘forget’ it, and now are back to hurling strawmen at me.
According to Calvin we are all sinners and he is jesus coming in to save us from our own vices.
Be nice now. No need to be excessively …combative. We all have the built-in arrogance that ‘our’ view is more ‘correct’. He is not alone in that.
We all have our blindspots – Calvin and others with differing views can help us fix them.
Occasional….debate friction is one thing, unnecessary allusions to religion etc…not quite the same.
On an unrelated note..I have a suggestion for an open thread – Mohsin Naqvi’s latest speech at the Pakistan economic summit where he says Pakistan has become ungovernable and needs a complete overhaul…surely he wont be speaking out of turn given that he serves at the mercy of the army..Something is brewing in the neighbourhood and maybe worth an open thread discussion..
(https://www.dawn.com/news/2019825)
He was discussing, more prosaically, about more provinces.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2621255/governance-system-has-collapsed-naqvi
I think this is happening. People speaking out against it are quickly doing a volte face and endorsing it.
I have no context on how great this is as an idea, but given Pakistans population increase over 80 years, some reorg might be due.
Yes population explosion is a huge issue for Pakistan, even though TFR has come down from 6 in the early 90s to 3.5 today ( For context, Bihar TFR is 2.8 ). Maybe that is another motivation for this speech. Pakistan is the youngest country in the subcontinent ( Average age is 21 )..India is 29 and even Nepal is 26 years avg age..
He did refer to potential cockroaches in their society overthrowing the administration
Was it Prosaic? Didn’t he say Pakistan has become ungovernable…there is only one man who is going around the world getting concessions and fame for Pakistan without crossing any redline…so sort this out in 6 months? red line is a coup and 6 months sounds like a notice period for the civilian admin…
So he just shot from the hip?…Surprising and reckless then given he has held significant positions in past and now – CM of Punjab and chairman of PCB, interior minister, and now ACC chairman 🙂
I dont have a team just want to clarify who I am.not with
I know I have flaws but firefighting for their favorite leaders and taking arguments against my views as attack on my honor are not one of them.
I feel there should be 2 teams.
Those that like to be identified with labels and those that don’t.
I would have pigeonholed everybody here, but that would reveal my team.
the 2 party system at BP (with broad neutrals) allows for very effective moderation.
a tight moderation, which also allows for the maximum possible range of views (within the law and common decency), is how BP can help in decolonisation.
otherwise moderating everyone on an individual basis would become overwhelming.
a thousand flowers are blooming even if there are only a few schools of thought..
still triggered by Serge Jordan and his moralising on the Great Mahatma.
You don’t know me so I don’t think you should indulge in diagnosing my politics.
I am a center-left Pakistani-American. I am so center-left that I voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 US Democratic primaries.
Outside of issues concerning Pakistan, I am a generic center-left American millennial. I spent all my formative years in the US and received all my education there.
Yes, I support the Pakistan Army. Unfortunately, Pakistan exists in a hostile neighborhood. We are a national security state. The Army is the one institution defending Pakistan from hostile neighbors.
Many members of my extended family (on my mother’s side) have served in Pak Fauj,
The Indians here defend the Indian Army right? Does that negate their progressive credentials?
On a more general note, I think the whole concept of “teams” is problematic. It lead to people stereotyping each other and being at each other’s throats. That was the issue with “Saffroniate” etc.
A two party system makes it very easy to moderate. Because moderating 10-15 individuals is very difficult; there has to be some classifier.
Also duality is critical to BP; it’s not a coincidence that people’s views tend to be in very alignment with their team.
I would say there is
Left Liberal
Centre (Soft) Right
Harder Right
Calvin is precisely the Nehruvian nationalist that you want India to conform too.. virtually no Pakistani likes India’s current iteration
I think my issue is more generally with the whole idea of “teams”. I think it flattens people’s views.
We saw that with the whole “Saffroniate vs. Crescentiate”. I don’t think relabeling it as “Progressives vs. Conservatives” is going to solve that particular problem.
I have no issues with Calvin. Outside of the India-Pakistan issue, I think we would probably agree on most things. I’m a Pakistani nationalist. I have no problem admitting that.
Also, I don’t think I’m on the same team as Q. I don’t support his views on gender for example. I tend not to disagree with him much here because I don’t make a habit of disagreeing with my fellow Pakistanis in public.
If this had been a Pakistani blog, I would have been going after Q much more harshly.
Agree. Again quoting Fly Die (he’s not been active for awhile), I think most people are centrist with more strong opinions on topics they feel deeply about. The patriarchy debate was instructive on social conservatism vs liberalism with the religious angle to boot.
However, I think the current framing of “teams” is more from a political affiliation perspective.
Plenty of immigrants are ‘liberal and progressive’ in the US where their rights are under threat and conservative in their home country.
With respect to Pakistan you are a clear supporter of the status quo as shown with your support of the army. If the army rules against say supporting Hindustani music hypothetically your own love for the culture will not lead to criticize them especially it this decision is dressed up in nationalism.
Since we are not talking about the US but the subcontinent, I consider you to be a conservative rather thsn a progressive no matter your voting choices.
I don’t think anyone on this blog is in a position to hand out certificates of “progressiveness” to anyone else. This is why the whole idea of “teams” is inherently problematic.
I am a center-left Pakistani-American. I have written extensively about what being center-left means to me.
I support women’s rights, LGBT rights etc. I am not by any means “conservative”.
Support for one’s army doesn’t inherently negate someone’s progressiveness. Are you seriously going to claim that supporters of the Congress Party don’t support the Indian Army?
By the way, I am not 100% uncritical of Pak Fauj. I have never supported the abrogation of Pakistan’s Constitution through direct military coups. In fact, General Musharraf’s removal of Mian Sahab is one of the first news events I recall.
supporting totalitarian regimes over democracy by calling them hybrid or ‘nat sec’ is the opposite of liberalism.
Supporting the army is not the same as supporting their kleptocracy.
I am a nationalist. Pakistan’s national security is my prime concern.
There are many Indians of all political opinions who will support their own army if push comes to shove.
The amount of respect that Indians give Modi is the same amount of respect that most Pakistanis give Pak Fauj.
Calm – I had to edit out half ur comment
Kabir doesn’t’ necessarily claim at consistency nor should he?
He is a liberal except when it comes to a core concern of his, which is Pakistan.
Why is that a contentious position?
I don’t think anyone should be in the business of giving out certificates of progressivism.
I take great offense to my center-left credentials being questioned.
Its not…contentious. But masquerading hard right nationalism and Islam-first TNT extremism as ‘center left liberalism’ is intellectually dishonest.
Such categorization is not necessarily the focus but it becomes… allowably debatable when its relevant to discussion topic.
He is free to view himself as ‘center left liberal’ or a martian from Jupiter, but others are also free to dispute it.
FWIW, I’m genuinely making a good faith effort not to …trigger his sensitivities, and walking on some eggshells in the process.
Then why do you take great offense to Calvin labeling you a defender of the regime?
Apply the same standards to me that you apply to yourself.
“TNT extremism”– TNT is the official ideology of Pakistan. Every patriotic Pakistani believes in this.
Without TNT a Pakistani is no different from an Indian Muslim and there is no basis for the existence of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
I’m sorry but a world in which the Islamic Republic of Pakistan doesn’t exist is completely unacceptable to me.
Pakistan’s existence…..is not under the threat that you seem to think it is. And most if not all Indians aren’t really in the business of disputing it. I’m certainly not.
As far as my …discussions with Calvin goes, if you notice, our debates have gotten quite contentious with fierce disagreement without resorting to personal attacks 🙂
He is free to make assumptions about my political leanings, and I am free to dispute it. The same applies to you.
The existence of the Islamic Republic is justified by TNT. TNT is not “extremism”. It is the mainstream position and the very basis of the nation’s existence.
TNT is by definition based on religion based apartheid logic. You are free to worship it as whatever you see fit. Demanding that others ‘see it the way you do’ is….unrealistic.
RNJ pls also tone it down.
“Apartheid” is an offensive word. We’ve been over this multiple times.
Just as an analogy: Zionism is the basis of Israeli nationalism. Would you constantly tell an Israeli how terrible you think Zionism is? If not, then why do you think you can constantly tell a Pakistani that TNT is “extremism”.
TNT is the basis of Pakistani nationalism. Without it, we would be part of an Indian nation-state which would be Hindu majority. You can see why that outcome would be absolute anathema to the vast majority of Pakistanis.
Without TNT, there would be no Bangladesh either. I’m sure the vast majority of Bangladeshis also wouldn’t want to be part of a Hindu majority country.
You are entitled to whatever views you want to hold on TNT. But it is very disrespectful to insult it in front of Pakistanis.
As I’ve said before, at bottom your issue is that a section of the Muslims of British India made the decision to rule ourselves in territory in which we were demographically the majority.
Apartheid is technically not correct either in Pakistan’s case. Minorities can live anywhere but probably have glass ceilings (but depends on which minority, feels more like a class thing).
I think he is referring to the fact that a non-Muslim cannot be Prime Minister, President, Army Chief etc.
Anyway, “apartheid” is a loaded and offensive term.
The larger point is that if one would not tell an Israeli to their face that Zionism is “extremism” or whatever, then one should not tell a Pakistani to his face that TNT is “extremism”. This comes under basic respect.
If Israel has the right to exist than so does Pakistan.
Since you don’t want to us to repeatedly litigate TNT, I’ll leave it here.
calm
Pakistan has geographic coherence and culturally only bleeds into India strongly in northern/central punjab. There is no danger of being reabsorbed, even if the TNT loses all credibility. Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka all have overlapping cultural zones with India, and with more hindus too, but they have robust, independent political identities.
“There is no danger of being reabsorbed”– Pakistan is a nuclear power of 255 million people. It’s obviously not going to be “reabsorbed”.
We were never part of “India”. We were part of British India which was a colony. The nation-states of “India” and “Pakistan” were created at the exact same moment.
However, what you and others on this forum don’t understand is that Pakistan is an ideological state. The ideology of Pakistan is the TNT.
Without it we are absolutely nothing. We may as well not exist as a nation-state.
Kabir, calm your language and don’t condescend. It’s not polite or calm, as you know girt is a very high signal commentator.
“Condescension” is subjective.
People condescend to me every day. Apparently I have to put up with it?
Parse through Girmit’s comment and tell me exactly where he condescended towards you to warrant your initial response?
I was making a more general point. “Condescension” is subjective.
There have been many many instances where I have been disrespected.
“Politeness” is also subjective.
I would personally err on allowing freedom of speech unless someone is being egregiously offensive.
Freedom of Speech is essentially but so is courtesy; you are wrong in how you misspoke to Girmit.
Also you were the one who started the whole “let’s not blaspheme on BP.”
So free speech would then extend into religion ultimately?
I think different people are being held to different standards of politeness. But I’ll leave it there.
The problem with “courtesy” is that’s a very vague term. Maybe it needs to be defined explicitly.
As for “blasphemy” my point is that if the Prophet of God is allowed to be insulted than so are gods of any other religion. I don’t think you want to go in that direction.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean the right to insult religion. That falls under “courtesy” surely?
Kabir, with respect, ever since I’ve been tighter on you (particularly), all of the Flame Threads have dissipated.
I think you conflate a lot of Principles with also personal behaviour.
With the exception of say RNJ & 0M, who like to tumble with you, there is virtually no other moderation on this blog (whether Q, Calvin, Agni or any of the rest).
I’m simply giving this for your edification but I think prior to the Gender Precedent Partition; I’d be very sensitive to this idea that the blog is inherently biased, when it’s really not.
I do agree that there is a tilt but it is not significant (I’d meditated on this that if Calvin had been an Indian Muslim, I’d probably have scanned his writing for anti-nationalism etc but then the Muslims of undivided India did kind of agitate to split into multiple nations whereas every other religious minorities seems pretty content with their natio states).
So it is a balancing act but yes we can discuss ideas with light and not heat. I have no problem with discussing religion, respectfully, but it also feels like a “masala topic” rather than a substantive one.
On a slightly different note the Audrey Truchske event is tonight ..
Are you attending it?
Couldn’t be bothered in the end haha – joined a online Prayer meet instead of the Indian Bahá’í community
Far better and constructive alternative 🙂
may check out the video to write a post on it eventually
//I’d meditated on this that if Calvin had been an Indian Muslim, I’d probably have scanned his writing for anti-nationalism etc but then the Muslims of undivided India did kind of agitate to split into multiple nations whereas every other religious minorities seems pretty content with their natio states//
Why would be so distrustful of an Indian muslim if they are here. Many of the things Indian muslims do, are things other communities do as well but is treated differently. Why reflexively think that Indian muslim being critical of RW talking points is a sign of anti nationalism?
Yes, that was a strange statement.
Is it? Would a Pakistani Hindu really be allowed to criticise Pakistan and lead protests against the Army?
No one in Pakistan can lead protests against the Army. Their religion doesn’t come into it.
The whole notion of people being “anti-national” is a right-wing notion.
Because of Partition?
Most muslims in India consider partition a bad thing and are deacendat of those who did not have the right to vote on it and have been bearing the brunt of animosity due to it.
That is fine and Muslims in India are indigenous.
However the Kabir perspective is there; they are liberal when they need to be and conservative otherwise.
So India *must* remain secular but Pakistan needn’t.
Calvin you do benefit from Christian privilege in the sense you are not scanned for anti-nationalism.
If DP, whose Facebook post I quoted, had been Muslim or Muslim-names, I would have never quoted him. So yes there is definitely a cost to Partition.
The Hindufication of India is a foregone event; let’s not forget Christians ordinarily carry Hindu names, are very idol-adjacent (the Shrines are made in the local template) and consider themselves very much Indian. Also the dominant Western hegemon they are aligned to is also favoured by Hindutva.
There is still a ton of educational privilege, which like reservations disproportionately affects the lower class upper caste hard working kid, but thats secondary.
Muslims stand apart, proudly, in almost every way. That is their right but then that comes at the cost that they must be circumspect in certain matters.
//However the Kabir perspective is there; they are liberal when they need to be and conservative otherwise.
//
This is something all communities do, they act liberal and conservative depending on what benefits, this is most apparent in the diaspora. But we can see echoes of this even in India, one example is many agriculatural castes simultaneously want to see themselves as downtrodden and poor and descendants of kings of yore. Nothing new and spectacular, I dont know why Muslims doing this is something strange.
//So India *must* remain secular but Pakistan needn’t.//
I dont think any Indian muslim will say Pakistan should not become more secular, dont know why exactly do you seem to impose pakistani muslim viewpoints on Indian muslims who obviously will disagree very much with Kabir on this matter.
//Muslims stand apart, proudly, in almost every way. That is their right but then that comes at the cost that they must be circumspect in certain matters.
There is still a ton of educational privilege, which like reservations disproportionately affects the lower class upper caste hard working kid, but thats secondary.//
Since apparently my comments are too long, let me end this by saying, that considering people anti national due to them being critical of some socio-political is lazy argumentation, especially when there are forces in society inimical towards them for things they are not responsible for.
I also disagree that the Indian muslims wants to be seperate in many matters and are much closely aligned to Indian cultural and philosophical tenets, just not ones that are very sanskritic in nature. Finally reservation and article 25 of the constitution dont penalize poor general category people, failure of government to make good quality education does.
Even if your comments are long, they are always excellent.
of course they consider partition a bad thing because they now realize that with ~35% of population they would have been “kings” and not just kingmakers that they were pre-2014. Look at the muslim votes in the 1946 elections.
+10
To add, as India progresses, the IM sees a stable future here, not with their cousins across the border. In no other non-Muslim state do they have so much veto power or rights to boot despite the perennial victim card play they indulge in.
just wrote on this..
Most muslims in India consider partition a bad thing
Why they oppose partition is perhaps worth investigating as well? I fear you will find the cause to be more aligned with Maulana Maududi than Mahatma G.
The problem is that the British really soured the milk. This is their MO; they never planned for their departure over decades.
I was reading on the territorial make up of the current Indian subcontinent; an easy case for 70-100 states in the whole region (Pakistan alone is 10-15).
Also the “British” cities should have been Federalised.
All I’m saying is that “courtesy” needs to be defined explicitly. Otherwise what happens is that any views one doesn’t like get branded “discourteous”.
I was thinking specifically of RNJ and OM. Constantly questioning my center-left credentials and using words like “kleptocracy” and “apartheid” is surely discourteous?
There is obviously a bias in the sense that the only regular commenters who are Muslim also happen to be Pakistani. So it is a space where the worldview is basically that of the center-right Indian Hindu (and I’m being polite here).
I do find the idea of you scanning a hypothetical Indian Muslim’s writing for “anti-nationalism” problematic.
Also, just to throw this out there but perhaps one reason the flame threads have dissipated is that BB is no longer here.
You are over litigating this.
Be courteous and polite and everything will work out just fine.
I’m saying that “courteous” and “polite” are subjective.
Many people say things to me which I consider incredibly disrespectful but they seem to get a pass.
Anyway, I’ll leave this here. But it may be worth spelling out exactly what your definition of courtesy is so that everyone is on the same page.
Also, the fact is that most of the “Dhurandaring” that used to go on was because of BB.
They are not. There is an objective standard.
Everyone is on pretty much on the same page.
Yes, for clarity, I don’t suggest that Pakistan’s independence is at the mercy of India or that it is a breakaway from it. The task of occupying any of the smaller countries , nepal or SL would also be beyond capability as well.
My point is that without TNT there is no basis for Pakistan’s existence. We are otherwise just North Indian Muslims.
Just as Israel is an ideological state, so is Pakistan.
If there were an “ideology of India” or “idea of India” (in Khilnani’s terms) it was Congress nationalism. Obviously that idea doesn’t hold so much anymore.
But the Indian Army is not the guardian of India’s ideology the way Pak Fauj is of TNT.
The army as you have mentioned in many threads is the leader of Pakistan, it is not elected, not accountable and frankly manipulates Pakistans foregin policy for its own benefits.
You maybe liberal-progressive wrt to US but not it is difficult to square with such uncritical support of the army.
I dont agree with many things the army does, but dont defend it
I am a nationalist. Pakistan’s national security is what is most important to me. And Pak Fauj is the guarantor of that national security.
For context, I have given my personal background. On my mother’s side I come from a family where many people have served in Pak Fauj.
I am center-left in the US and in Pakistan. Most Pakistanis are supportive of Pak Fauj.
Let’s just end it here.
Although we are probably on “different sides”, I am quite largely aligned with this view.
Welcome back!! Please resume contributing!
quite an iconic comeback line haha
So nice to see everyone having a fun conversation! 😀
it is interesting. the Partition of the Blog has happened in a way.. and it was on Gender. I may write on this
Yes, that was a very interesting partition of viewpoints.
Also suggests that being politically conservative and socially liberal aren’t mutually exclusive.
[…] Archer on Erm […]
On Truschke, I think that one should attend this event and then judge it rather than just rejecting it because one doesn’t like her. Or just admit that you are not the target audience.
This is a diaspora group based in Washington DC that I believe is mostly made up of Indian Muslims. Thus, it’s not a surprise that they are pro Mughal and pro Truschke.
**Just as BP is pro Hindu Right (I’m actually surprised by people openly admitting that they are pro-Savarkar vs. pro-Gandhi), this diaspora group is pro-Muslim. That’s fair no?***
Why surprise? I think I’ve been pretty open about my dislike for Gandhi’s politics and Nehruvian socialism?
I edited that bit about pro Hindu right; since it is an unfair reading. We partitioned on the Gender precedent.
When you have people openly preferring Savarkar to Gandhi it’s not “unfair” to say that the commentariat on this site leans towards the Hindu right.
Agree fully. Commentariat leaning should not be read as BP leaning.
Yes we are exceptionally fair and allow for all viewpoints; it’s just respect, courtesy and grace are simply non-negotiable in our current iteration.
I’m surprised that people would openly prefer Savarkar to Mahatma Gandhi.
I thought that it is not considered the done thing in India to not revere Mahatma Gandhi. Maybe it’s become more acceptable over the last 12 years.
In Pakistan, you cannot say a word against Quaid-e-Azam.
You should take a look at those comments on the substack, there were hundreds of them, mostly left wing Indians.
Sarvarkar was quite popular in college. Quite openly. He’s been rehabilitated more recently into public spaces, but this is not a new phenomenon.
It’s quite weird to me that someone whose ideology is responsible for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi can be rehabilitated.
My thesis is that most Indians of the majority faith really just dislike their fellow citizens of minority faiths. Either that or they finally feel free to state views that they have held all along.
In most countries one has to revere the founding fathers. I’m most familiar with the US. I don’t think anyone mainstream can say nasty things about George Washington or Thomas Jefferson.
Certainly, in Pakistan, it is not done to speak against the Quaid (though Hoodbhoy does so)
I’ve always been very pro Gandhi. I remember being quite upset when I read Arundhati Roy’s “The Doctor and the Saint”.
GW is generally not reviled. Jefferson is, quite often, about slave ownership, some of whom were his children.
Nathuram Godse is also not as reviled as you might think. His speech in his own defence in court was excellent and moved the judge to say, that if it were a jury trial, he would have been freed.
You can have your thesis, I don’t believe we can prevail upon you to change a made up mind. If anything I am possibly giving you more data points.
Sarvarkar, Godse, Gandhi, they were all men of very strong principles, maybe opposing views, but I believe they were very sincere in their causes. Godse, of course chose murder, there is no rehabilitating that, he expected to be dammed for the ages for it, and rightly so.
I think Godse still has plays which show his side of the argument in Marathi. ‘Mi Nathuram Godse Boltoy’ used to be a big thing even a long time ago.
Heard good reviews on it. I would want to watch the play.
Clubbing Savarkar with Godse, is a withered page of a tired playbook.
Yes, because clearly the assassin fired the bullet out of nowhere and there was no ideological influence on him whatsoever?
so if a bunch of plane hijackers are ‘ideologically influenced’ by the Koran, is it accurate to link the author to 9/11?
Consternation aside, the parallel that I am drawing isn’t inaccurate. Think about it. With respect.
The author of the Koran? You mean God himself?
Who has ever argued that the 9/11 attackers weren’t influenced by Islamic extremism? That’s not a serious argument.
Pandit Nehru banned the RSS after Gandhiji’s murder. Pretending like the ideology had no influence is disingenuous.
But you wouldn’t assert that the entirety of the Koran is ‘extremism’ right? And yet somehow when it comes to the RSS, you are quick to extrapolate in that fashion.
I am happy to mock the RSS and some of its positions, criticize them, but am merely pointing out that some of the ‘cancel’ rhetoric that’s hurled against them does not pass the credulity test.
The Holy Quran is an extraordinarily pragmatic document (without the Hadith).
If you were to *only* read the Quran, its exegesis is very liberal (give or take).
It’s the Hadiths that then give Islam, a more “austere form.”
My point was limited to drawing the parallel regarding ‘ideological influence’. I do not wish to get into critiquing religious texts or religion – especially when I am not well-informed on them. And honestly, I don’t want to be a jerk about it, at a minimum.
Using Godse and ‘inspired by Nazis’ are tired, flawed talking points that have been weaponized against the RSS – who by no means are above harsh criticism btw..
I just wish the criticism was more honest instead of peddling half-truths.
That is because the Quran lifts large portions of its text from the Christian Bible. To then localize the bible for the Arabs it adds several rules to interpret it.
Have you read the Quran?
There is literally an ayah which says “Let there be no compulsion in religion”
Anyway, I would advise you not to descend into Islamophobia.
The RSS is a political organization. It’s not a religion.
No he means Muhammed who copied most of the Bible and added a couple rules regarding interpretation to suit the Arab cultural context.
It is Islamic religious belief that the Quran is the direct word of Allah.
I would advise you not to go further in this direction. Otherwise, be prepared for your Laws of Manu to be criticized in a similar fashion.
Do it. I am a nastik. I wouldn’t even care if you burned the Manu Smriti. I just hope you don’t STSJ when I cast aspersions on the Quran for being a rather derivative document which wouldn’t pass a plag check when it was created.
Calm please.
You are entitled to your views on the Quran.
But is it really necessary to throw them in someone’s face in a discussion where its not even the primary topic?
Its just…..rude more than anything else at that point.
I’m fine with letting their religious views being rather irrational in private belief. Thats the nature of religious belief. But if these topics become part of public discussion some level of critique should be expected. If these topics are some kind of a “Holy Cow” for the other side perhaps they shouldn’t be a topic for discussion at all.
OK everyone, please let’s not go down this path again.
If I may, I don’t think either RNJ or OM are trying to be disrespectful. In general, Hindus are quite tolerant to questioning scripture, be it of any faith including their own. This enquiry comes from that thought process.
Saying that the Quran is not the word of God is a statement that is deeply offensive to any believing Muslim.
There should be no criticism of anyone’s religion.
We’re really creating blasphemy laws in the website from first principles.
We’ve all seen that criticism of people’s religions doesn’t lead to a good place.
I’m……in slight agreement with you that folks should not hurl needlessly rude remarks about religions not their own. However, demanding that ..non-believers treat Quran as ‘word of God’ is….a bit of a reach.
You know very well that every believing Muslim holds the Quran to be divinely revealed scripture.
Implying that it is not is offensive on its face.
Would you tell a Jew that the Torah is not the word of God? That is needlessly offensive.
The Church of Later Day Saints believe that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon from buried golden plates shown to him by an angel named Moroni. I have told Mormons that their god isn’t real to their faces before. I have done so to Muslims, Hindus, Catholics, and Protestant. The only Muslims person seem to have some kind of crisis in faith because of this is you.
I’m not having a crisis of faith.
I’m just saying it is gratuitously offensive to tell someone their religious beliefs are false.
Ok lets leave at this everyone . Don’t continue this conversation please; its fine we can pause here
Half the Jews I know don’t believe in the Torah themselves.
You were pretty blunt about ‘idol’ worship?
What on earth – Kabir
It is offensive to Muslims to imply that the Holy Quran is not divinely revealed scripture.
Remember when I called “The Ramayana” a myth and everyone lost it?
The same applies to the Quran.
Anyway, I’m just saying let’s not get into a religious discussion. It doesn’t end well.
The Bible is also the word of God.
Is it though? My understanding is that both the Bible and the Koran are the word of God as communicated by the Prophets (and presumably written down by someone else)
The 10 commandments are the word of the Abrahamic God, whereby God writes it personally upon 2 tablets.
That ‘word of’ is taking on the weight of creation. Large parts of the books aren’t God speaking though.
Never mind. Scratch the above comment, I don’t really want to wade into this.
The difference is that Christians don’t believe that the Gospels were directly revealed by God. There are four Gospels and each is the perspective of one person (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John).
Muslims believe that each word of the Quran was divinely revealed by Allah.
It was really Patel who led the crackdown. At any rate, Savarkar, who I don’t particularly care for, was never a member of the RSS but the Hindu Mahasabha. Interestingly the latter was not banned.
Why? Why is it tired? What playbook? Also I clubbed Sarvarkar, Godse and Gandhi.
Sarvarkar, while ideologically important, the man himself seems to have had a more conciliatory side compared to the other 2.
It is Godse’s uncompromising nature that made him a sinner.
It is Gandhi’s uncompromising nature that made him a saint.
We (you and I) can admire and try to understand the men without condoning some actions whilst cheering others.
We aren’t school children in need of ideological indoctrination. As you can see, the playbooks nowadays are to attack Gandhi the man out of time, place and understanding.
Sry, never mind, i scrolled down.
Criticizing Jefferson about Sally Hemmings is not an example of being “nasty” about him. It’s a historical fact.
However, he was still an important founding father. He wrote the Declaration of Independence. Most Americans will speak of him with the utmost respect.
All founding fathers are human beings. They are neither God nor prophets. I have no issues with criticisms that are situated within a valid historical context.
This is my personal opinion, I strongly believe that nobody’s conduct should be above questioning. If anything, this deification of flawed human beings has resulted in some horrific abuse of the vulnerable. Not to mention, turning a blind eye to obvious exploitation by those who should uphold law and order to deliver justice.
The founding fathers were neither God nor prophets. I never said that they are above criticism.
Arundhati Roy has criticized Gandhi from the left regarding his treatment of caste. This is a perfectly legitimate critique.
Didn’t think you did? I guess it tied in more due to your surprise of Gandhi not being revered as much in India and Jinnah still seen through a reverential lens.
I was referring to a healthy critique of any human being be they religious or political figures. Anyone who exerts a substantial influence on the rest ought not to be deified imo. It helps prevent exploitation on the basis of religious or moral authority.
I’m glad to see objective critical assessments of any historical or religious figure.
The Prophet of God cannot be criticized. Not in Islam.
Political leaders are not prophets and are certainly open to being criticized.
Why though? For a man claimed timeless moral examplar, his conduct was not …
You cannot criticize Muhammad, therefore you cannot truly weigh Chisti or Jinnah or … if someone dare speaks : STSJ-STSJ, exile, or Adiala.
The Prophet of God is above criticism in Islam. Just as many Hindus don’t take kindly to criticism of Lord Ram.
The Prophet of God cannot be compared to Quaid-e-Azam. Quaid-e-Azam was a political leader. One can certainly criticize his actions.
The Prophet of God directly received revelation from Allah. He is above all criticism.
It is deeply offensive to Muslims to state otherwise.
People dissect and criticize Ram’s choices and example openly and have done so for a long time.
‘in Islam/Pakistan’
It was deeply offensive for you when people criticized pak fauj and Munir. Is criticizing Muhammed deeper-ly, more-deeper-ly or deepest-ly offensive?
Muhammed made up revelations … and was not even a good human being what to say of being an exemplar for all times …
As a Bahá’í we do believe in the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and the Holy Quran being the Divine Word.
I am somewhat uncomfortable discussing this in a *loose* manner
I did not abuse or threaten Kabir. I think that is where the boundary should be, not where someone feels ‘uncomfortable’.
You think even a structured argument would convince anyone, including you?
‘deeply offensive’ to STSJ is a continuous spectrum.
One moment it is Muhammad, next moment it is Munir, Jinnah, Pak fauj, TNT … whoever, whatever is deemed politically expedient.
it is to reflect on. I think there should be carve-outs on religion.
I have stated above that you can criticize Quaid-e-Azam. He was a political leader and as such is not above criticism.
You can see the evidence that–much as I would have liked to– I have not been successful in shutting down criticism of Pak Fauj on this site.
Kabir I edited half your comment. Calm and don’t be Hinduphobic.
What is the issue in stating that if the Prophet of God can be criticized than so can gods of other religions?
I find it very interesting that the standard for “Hinduphobia” is much stricter than the standard for Islamophobia.
History is …human. Its a sign of maturity if one is able to view historical figures in shades of grey instead of hagiography.
We can praise notable aspects of historical men and women while not airbrushing their flaws. I have gotten into some ‘heated discussions’ with some of my Bengali friends when I point out the ‘warts’ on Subhash Chandra Bose and his ….choices.
Couldn’t agree more.
Hasn’t it become more fashionable in the US to call out the fact that Jefferson was a slave owner.
Weren’t all the founding fathers slave owners? They have to be seen in the context of their own times.
Anyway, I have already said that political leaders are not God or prophets. They can certainly be criticized while keeping the historical context in mind.
Attacking Gandhi was quite common even back in the 1980s.
She has made Hinduphobic comments. Also Aligarh hosting her is a bit much.
All the white intellectuals (Dalyrymples, Truschke, the Gandhian author) all tend to romanticise the Muslim era, which incidentally the Brits demolished brick by brick.
Even if the Marathas and Sikhs had taken over; it would have been a much more hybrid culture.
Is she against Hindus as such or just Hindu nationalism? She has also received threats of violence against her which are unacceptable to give to any academic.
Anyway, the point is you’re not her target audience, which is fine. This particular diaspora group is mostly Indian Muslims. They are her target audience.
she has …figured out that provocative ragebaiting against a billion Indians can be monetized quite profitably.
Its iterative, William has been quick to learn and realize that the ‘grift’ is better if one shifts with the Overton window.
Trushke’s trash will eventually serve as a case study of bias in ‘academic’ work.
Again, you are not the target audience. That’s fine.
I’m not the target audience for people praising Savarkar.