Mid-Nov Circular

Dear all,

With everything going on in the last 48 hours, we wanted to send a short note to everyone directly. BP has sputtered back to life in the past year, and with that revival comes all the familiar subcontinental pathologies: everyone believes they’re right, everyone believes moderation is biased, and everyone believes someone else is being unfair. In that sense, BP is working exactly as it always has.

We want to restate something very clearly: we’re not going to run a hyper-moderated blog. It takes too much time, too much energy, and, crucially, it’s an unfunded mandate. Nothing is more dispiriting than a dead space. Our approach has been simple and consistent:

1. Authors control their own threads.

If things escalate on your post, you shut it down when and where you see fit. That’s the cleanest system and the only one we can realistically sustain.

2. No bans, shadow bans, or entrapment games.

Once we go down the path of micro-policing, BP loses its character. That’s not the direction we want to take.

3. We do not manufacture controversy.

If anything, the only thing we are biased toward is what the audience reads and engages with. That’s it. Everything else is noise.

Reflections:

Some of you will have seen the recent exchanges where accusations were thrown in both directions, and where intentions were questioned. Without going into details: this is exactly how online political communities melt down; by assuming the worst in each other and by escalating minor provocations into existential battles. It’s the same pattern we saw a couple of years ago at a public talk by Rahul Gandhi in Cambridge: someone asked a loaded, “gotcha” question, the out of context reply went viral, people got outraged, and the whole thing became a cycle of reaction and overreaction. We’re drifting into the same dynamic.

Let’s not.

BP works only when people post, comment, disagree, and move on. If that stops, the blog dies. And as Omar’s recent post highlighted, we want authors to write more, not less.

So our simple request is this: Calm down, carry on, manage your own threads, and do not fall prey to the outrage factory.

If you feel strongly about a situation, reach out; if you want more balance, we’re happy to add an additional admin to offset the load (BP’s editorial board already functions with more factions than the Lebanese Parliament); if something crosses a line, handle it on your post. But let’s not turn BP into a miniature Whitehall where everything becomes bureaucratised. We’ve done extremely well this past year. Let’s keep the energy without burning down the house.

Warmly.

Islam the Religion of Peace part ii

Samir Zitouni, a 48-year-old rail worker, is in critical condition after stepping between a knife-wielding attacker and passengers on a Doncaster–London train. Witnesses say he blocked the assailant from stabbing a girl and was slashed across the head and neck.

He has worked for LNER for more than twenty years. His managers call his actions “nothing short of heroic.” The attacker, Anthony Williams, has been charged with ten counts of attempted murder.

A Muslim man (most likely Algerian origin) from the Midlands saw people in danger and acted without hesitation.

 

Egalitarian/Equality and mobility in Society.

Something to keep in mind, an egalitarian/equal society is equally important to happiness of society.

Excerpts from Article

While the US ranks among the least equal and mobile countries in the developed world, recent work shows that it contains places that span the global mobility distribution.

Persistence in income from one generation to the next is higher in unequal societies like the UK and the US, and weakest in the relatively equal Scandinavian countries (the ‘Great Gatsby curve’)

Would would this map out similarly in South Asia, I think yes)

For example, equality and mobility are highest in the Midwest, where Scandinavian ancestry is common. The same goes for every group we study – for example, income mobility is lowest in areas where the population has Italian or British roots.

From Comments (read them too, please).
One should point also out the common observation that all that Scandinavian solidarity is built on a great deal of ethnic homogeneity. The US problem has always been getting the melting pot to melt.

My mother, life-long Republican and descendant of Swedish grand-parents, blamed the “socialist” bent in MN on the dumb Ole-and-Lena’s who maintained their village mind-set of caring-through-conformity post-immigration. In her opinion, worldly-wise people knew better than to just hand money out to strangers. I thought about that a little when reading Tuesday’s piece about trust in society, and cat sick’s comment that keeping business (or wealth) within networks is a way to mitigate risk.

Can inter-sect marriages save Pakistani society?

“I am Muslim and nothing else,” says 23-year-old Sana*. Growing up in a multi-sect home it wasn’t until Sana was a teenager that she felt the distinct divide society wanted to categorise her in. An outgoing and ambitious young professional Sana, with a Shia father and Sunni mother, continues to resist societal pressure to declare allegiance to either religious sect.
Her live and let live policy along with the unwillingness to “choose sides” is something she staunchly stands by and contrary to popular belief nothing about Sana indicates she is not a well-adjusted individual. Living in a loving home where understanding and tolerance supersede prejudice and narrow-mindedness she is happy to have the opportunity to be exposed to both sects.
Aurangzeb Khan, 22, has also been raised in a multi-sect home. Since he turned 12, Aurangzeb showed an inclination towards his mother’s sect, who is a Shia. He admits he was initially uneasy about the distinction between how he and his father offered their prayers but says,

 

Hands by my sides or folded, all I know is that I am praying before the same God.

 

http://www.dawn.com/news/1083796/shia-sunni-marriages-till-faith-do-us-part
My paternal grandfather was of a Sunni background (before he converted) and my grandmother’s family was of Shi’ite Sayyid lineage (before they converted). One astonishing thing about the Baha’i community is the nature of the constant mixing; among the Persian Baha’i Jewish, Zoroastrian and Muslim backgrounds intermingle in the same individual. It’s perhaps the best way for the world to heal when we’re all (more closely) related together.

A lonely BP

Since most of our contributors haven’t been enabled yet it’s pretty much me manning the fort. Two always riveting pieces from Centre India (lest I deviate from a “Brown” Topic) . The below is from Harsh Gupta who I follow on twitter and it touches on Indian identity, which is an apparently inexhaustible topic (like Israeli identity) since they have to at least nominally some measure of inclusion (purport to be liberal democracies) yet also chauvinism (such is the way of nationalism).

 

The Indian centre-left tries to co-opt Christians, dalits, tribals and the “very poor” into a coalition that is electorally sustainable. In 2009, large sections of the urban middle class too went with them. But they are now coming back towards the BJP, which has grown from middle and upper castes in North India to a broader coalition.
The Muslim percentage of population of what is now India is about half of what it was in 1924, because of the partition, despite faster population growth amongst Indian Muslims. The 2011 census results as far as I know have not yet been broken down by religion, but the Muslim population should be around 15%, higher than 13.6% in 2001. This would mean the Indian Muslim population is around 180-190 million Muslims. The 250 million number peddled by fanatics – both Hindu and Muslim – is simply inaccurate. Sikhs and especially Christians make significant religious minorities as well. A Letter to Indian Muslim Youth
India and identity – In ten pieces Varshney’s writing (‘Why India must allow hyphens‘, IE, Feb 13) that “If Indians can be Gujarati Indians or Hindu Indians, why can’t there be Muslim Indians or Christian Indians?”, is a strawman. Nobody is saying Indians cannot see themselves and fellow citizens as belonging to any group. The argument is simply for the government to not see Indians as Hindus, Muslims, and Christians or so on… 9. Against entrenched identities – Indian Express
…it is high time the Indian state breaks from Nehru’s construct of seeing religious minorities as “separate from us” and stops indulging in the “soft bigotry of low expectations” from certain communities.
Brown Pundits