Homebound with Ishaan Khatter

X.T.M · September 29, 2025 · 148 comments

Last night Dr. Lalchand & I watched Homebound, India’s submission to the Oscars, at Apple Cinemas in Cambridge, Mass. This sad film follows a Dalit (Chandan Kumar) and a Muslim (Mohammed Shoaib Ali) struggling against the odds during the pandemic, their solidarity fictionalized as a fragile bridge across India’s deepest divides.

On the surface, it is a familiar story: the disenfranchised facing systemic barriers. But what struck me was how privilege itself performed disenfranchisement. Ishaan Khatter, brother to Shahid Kapoor, plays the marginalized Muslim. Janhvi Kapoor, descended from Bollywood royalty, embodies a Dalit woman. Vishal Jethwa, a bright-eyed Gujarati, portrays the Bhojpuri Dalit lead. This is not unique to India; Hollywood, too, casts elites as workers. Yet it raises the question: when poverty is performed rather than lived, is it “Dalit-washing”?

Poverty, Emotion, and Representation

Watching the film, I reflected on poverty’s emotional landscape. For elites, emotions can be expansive, indulgent, aestheticized into art. For the working poor, emotions are often constrained by survival — narrowed into necessity. Homebound tried to humanize its characters, but I wondered whether it romanticized what in practice is a relentless narrowing of possibility.

The West rewards this narrative. Parasite in Korea, Iranian cinema, Slumdog Millionaire — poverty & Global South tribulations as spectacle becomes “poverty porn.” The Guardian gave Homebound four stars. Great art often tilts melancholic, yes, but here the melancholia is curated for Western consumption.

Identity, Vectors, and Islamicate Selfhood

More unexpectedly, the film stirred something personal. I realized how much I have vacated my own Islamic identity. It was not traumatic. As a Bahá’í with Persian cultural roots, I found overlap — even comfort — in Hindu traditions. Dalits, in their rapid Hinduization, represent one vector of assimilation; Muslims and scheduled-caste Muslims, often in tension, another. Homebound imagines solidarity, but in life these vectors pull unequally. Continue reading Homebound with Ishaan Khatter

The River Cannot Go Back

X.T.M · September 29, 2025 · 6 comments

I wanted to share something that floored me. Through Sahil Bloom, I came across this poem by Kahlil Gibran, and it struck me with its simplicity and depth. As an aside, it is worth remembering that Gibran was deeply inspired by ʻAbdu’l-Bahá, whose vision of unity and spiritual renewal touched many thinkers and artists of his time.

For the Commentariat, it’s worth noting that one of the 20th century’s greatest poets had Muslim antecedents: Gibran’s maternal great-grandfather converted from Islam to Christianity, a reminder that conversion did happen, and that traditions were more porous than the common perception that “Muslims can never leave Islam.”

The River Cannot Go Back

It is said that before entering the sea

a river trembles with fear.

She looks back at the path she has traveled,

from the peaks of the mountains, Continue reading The River Cannot Go Back

Roman Palestine and the Crusades

sbarrkum · September 29, 2025 · 13 comments

I am quite familiar with History of England and Europe since even before my teens. That was because my father had beautifully illustrated school History text books from England. Plus many historical novels eg Walter Scotts The Talisman which is set in Palestine during the Crusades. I read them all many times over as nothing better to do as no TV then in SL till 1977.

Let us start with the historical Jewish Diaspora. Historical as verified from sources other than the Bible. The Romans controlled the middle east around 1 BC. (Think Julius Caesar and Cleopatra an Egyptian Queen of Greek Origin)

To quote
Asia Minor after the Macedonian Wars (214–148 B.C.). In 63 B.C. The defeat of the Carthaginians gave Rome almost complete control of the Mediterranean. Romans conquered most of Asia Minor in 188 B.C., Syria and Palestine in 64 and 63 B.C.

In 70 C.E. (a few years after the purported passing of Jesus Christ the Romans Destroyed the Judaism Temple in Jerusalem. Apparently this ended the ability to make animal sacrifices to God (Yahweh). Plus the Roman persecution of the Jews and Judaism led to their disperal from Palestine, i.e. the Diaspora

Note: There is no evidence of a Kingdom or Country called Israel in any of the Historical or Pre-historical records of the Babylonians and Assyrians. There was region called Palestine (Palaistinê, Παλαιστῑ́νη) since at least since the Greek times. The word Israel became considered “Fact” when Europe became Christian and the Bible an accepted source of fact given by the Divine. The Jews became notable and rich because they were money lenders. Christians (and Muslims) are forbidden to lend money on interest (usury). Think Merchant of Venice and Shylock the Jew

Continue reading Roman Palestine and the Crusades

The Changing Demographics of Undivided India (1900–2025)

X.T.M · September 25, 2025 · 18 comments

South Asia’s demography is one of the great untold stories of the modern world. Too often we look at the subcontinent through today’s partitions — India, Pakistan, Bangladesh — but the real insight comes when we view the region as a single whole. Across 125 years, the balance of populations has shifted dramatically.

📊 1900: A Baseline

At the turn of the twentieth century, Muslims made up about 20% of undivided India’s population. The rest were overwhelmingly Hindu, with significant Sikh, Christian, Jain, and other minorities.

📊 1950: Partition and Realignment Continue reading The Changing Demographics of Undivided India (1900–2025)

Travelling – Open Thread

X.T.M · September 24, 2025 · 60 comments

🔗 Links shared from the comments

💬 Keep the links and thoughts coming — BP works best when the Commentariat bring their own sources into the mix.

On Islamism, the Oneness of Mankind, and the Burden of Public Bahá’ís

X.T.M · September 23, 2025 · 1 comment

For too long, the term Islamism has functioned as a lazy shorthand in Western discourse; one that often sanitizes the dehumanization and securitization of Muslim bodies. And when it’s used by those claiming spiritual insight, especially from within a global Faith like the Bahá’í Faith, it becomes more than just a rhetorical misstep. It becomes a betrayal.

This week, a prominent British Bahá’í comedian made such a misstep.

A Moment of Caution — Dismissed

When Omid Djalili posted a news clip, which gently reframed the Bahá’í concept of the Oneness of Mankind, I appreciated the gesture. In fact, I said so. The “toe-stubbing” analogy was clever, and there was something moving in seeing profound principles gently repackaged for a wider audience.

But I raised one concern: the reference to Islamism. It was, I suggested, overwrought, unnecessary, and ultimately unwise. I proposed an alternative: perhaps rephrasing the same concern as “security anxieties around mass migration” or similar language that doesn’t dog-whistle. This wasn’t a condemnation. It was, as any Bahá’í should recognize, consultation. An invitation to reflection.

Instead, I was told: “Look up the word.”

The Burden of Bahá’ís in Public

It’s not about semantics. It’s about responsibility. And especially so when one is invoking sacred teachings, teachings that thousands upon thousands have died for; on public platforms. The Bahá’í Faith is not a marketing device to win over a Western liberal audience by soft-launching its principles in the language of border panic and counter-terrorism.

To reduce Islamism to a “technical English-language distinction” is disingenuous. The term has never been neutral. In nearly all Western contexts, it has become a floating signifier for violence, extremism, and “dangerous Muslims.” It serves to other, to isolate, and to justify state and vigilante violence often against entirely innocent people (Afghanistan, Iraq & Palestine).

And when Bahá’ís, of all people, repeat that language without self-awareness, without contrition, and without consultation, we should all be worried.

The Problem Isn’t the Joke. It’s the Response.

I understand the pressures of performance. I’ve done media. I know how easy it is to slip. What matters is what happens next. When another Bahá’í, someone you know, someone with many mutual connects, raises a concern gently and in good faith, the correct response isn’t smugness. It isn’t defensiveness. It certainly isn’t “learn English.”

That response is hurtful, racist, and deeply contrary to the values we both claim to serve. And that’s what cut. Not the line in the show but the refusal to listen afterwards. The arrogance of elite Bahá’ís who believe proximity to celebrity, applause, or power gives them carte blanche to reframe revelation in their own image.

This Is Why We Need to Talk

As Brown Pundits reshapes itself, I’m re-examining my own priors, too. What voices we platform. What values we uphold. Who gets to speak for our communities and under what banner.

So I say this plainly: The oneness of mankind cannot be proclaimed by marginalizing Muslims. And Bahá’ís, especially public ones, must hold themselves to the standard of humility, consultation, and truthfulness we profess to believe in. We cannot serve justice while echoing injustice. We cannot preach unity while casually reinscribing division. The world is watching. Let’s be worthy of what we claim.

The Ilhan Omar of Brown Pundits

X.T.M · September 22, 2025 · 31 comments

Every movement has its lightning rods. In American politics, Ilhan Omar is one: progressive, unyielding, often correct in substance but polarizing in style. She calls out genuine injustices, but her timing and tone can sometimes drown out the very points she is trying to make.

I’ve begun to realize that Kabir plays a similar role on Brown Pundits. Like Ilhan, he often raises necessary truths (for instance Israel has just killed an American family in Lebanon). Like Ilhan, he brings traffic, visibility, and energy. But also like Ilhan, he has a way of inflaming rather than persuading.

Charlie Kirk’s remarks illustrate why Ilhan Omar’s critiques resonate, even if her tone divides. When Kirk sneers that there are “no tall buildings left in Gaza,” or jokes that Palestinians are “stupid Muslims” for resisting, he is not just making political commentary. He is engaging in dog-whistling — racialized, sexist, Islamophobic rhetoric that devalues human life. Combined with his earlier comments about the supposed lack of “brain processing power” among prominent Black women, the pattern is unmistakable. One does not have to be a progressive to see that such speech corrodes the civic space. At the same time, none of this justifies violence: the murders of Charlie Kirk and Irina Zarutska are deplorable and must be condemned without qualification.

The Progressive Dilemma Continue reading The Ilhan Omar of Brown Pundits

Pakistan: The Realpolitik State

X.T.M · September 21, 2025 · 59 comments

In a recent exchange, Kabir suggested that Pakistanis often feel unwelcome in our discussions on Brown Pundits, and that constant criticism of their country creates a sense of unease. It is worth pausing to reflect on this. Pakistanis, like all of us, are shaped by history and circumstance. And yet, there is something in the cultural tenor of Pakistan that makes open engagement difficult.

I say this not to provoke but to observe. Pakistan, as a society, often leans heavily on hierarchism, patronage, and a culture of deference. To borrow an old saying about the Somalis, that every man thinks himself a Sulṭán, one might say that Pakistanis often view themselves through the prism of status and validation. This instinct is hardly unique; Indians, too, have their caste-bound privileges and invisible hierarchies. But in India, these structures are embedded in a dense cultural fabric; family, caste, neighbourhood, ritual, that, for all their flaws, anchor society. Pakistan, by contrast, feels less rooted. It is a younger country (with old traditions), with fewer inherited cultural layers to draw on.

This is not simply an abstract point. When I married, we drew freely from Hindu rituals (dual ceremonies, Bahá’í incl.), Persian customs, and Sindhi traditions, blending them into something whole. But I realised there was nothing distinctly “Pakistani” to contribute; no cultural motif that stood outside India or Iran (we didn’t do a Walima, which is Muslim). Pakistan is, in many ways, a derivation: a state forged through separation, rather than a civilization with deep roots of its own. The cultural space it occupies has been overlaid with militant nationalism and, too often, Hindu-phobia (Kabir is so inured to it that he isn’t able to recognise that but on the flipside so is the Commentariat towards Islam).

To acknowledge this is not to deny the prejudices of Indians toward Muslims, which are very real and enduring. Nor is it to ignore the deracinated, secular archetype embodied by figures like Benazir Bhutto, who seemed neither fully Muslim nor fully Western, suspended between worlds and who are the cultural elite of Pakistan (what they give up on their bridge is their Hindu origins; more than being half-Persian, Benazir’s nani was Hindu). It is simply to note that Pakistan’s cultural story remains unsettled & thus interesting.

Validation and Audience Continue reading Pakistan: The Realpolitik State

Brown Pundits