Women are often involved in ‘honour’ killings as perpetrators, but it has tended to be older women (such as aunts and mother-in-laws) who help with the murder. This case in India is the first I have read about in which it was the daughter of the victim who arranged the murder:

“The girl planned her mother’s murder and hired two contract killers for the job who eliminated Mohinder Kaur (45) in Malout town here on Saturday. Veer Pal [20] was incensed over her mother’s “illicit relationships” with two men who would frequent the house, with one of them routinely staying back with her overnight.

A source said Veer Pal decided on extreme action when, despite repeated suggestions and warnings, Mohinder continued with her liasions without a thought to the family’s prestige. During police interrogation, it was revealed that the girl hired two persons and promised to pay them Rs 1 lakh to get her mother killed.”

(Via Kawthar at the indispensable International Campaign Against Honour Killings)

In recent months I’ve been reading a fair bit about feminism and attending feminist events in London. ‘Third wave feminism’, as it is being dubbed, is attracting a lot of interest, and the vitality at these events is very awe-inspiring. I have no trouble calling myself a feminist - the view that women should have complete equality in all spheres of life and be fully free to make decisions about their bodies and their lives (hence my strong support for abortion). This view, incidentally, is also a central tenet to Sikhism, the most feminist of all faiths.

But I’m interested in all this for a bigger reason. This blog is mostly about race and religion-based issues in modern Britain. It is about how we can all live together. But the point is this. Any discussion of racial equality cannot take place without understanding how other factors affect people. How their gender affects them, how their opportunities are affected by poverty (class) and even by their legal status (immigration).

Burmese state radio states the official death toll of last weekend’s Cylcone Nargis to be 22,980 with over 40,000 missing and thousands injured. If this data is not devastating enough, fears are now growing that the figure might be as high as 100,000 deaths. According to the UN, more than 1 million people are currently without shelter. For millions, the struggle now is for survival. The real risk now is the outbreak of acute diarhhoea, malaria or even cholera.

The other day Sunny and I were discussing the use of carefully collected data in targeting distinct groups of voters. Essentially this works by dividing people into different demographics, allowing campaign literature and policies to be tailored accordingly.

To a large extent this seems like common sense. However in recent years data collection and polling has become much more sophisticated. In his book “Microtrends”, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager Mark Penn claimed to have identified 75 different subgroups of people, ranging from Christian Zionists to Impressionable Elites. George Bush’s success in 2004 is also largely attributed to a very sucessful micro-targeting campaign by Karl Rove.

This passage from Democrat Strategist Ed Kilgore’s review of Mark Penn’s book highlights some key concerns and rebuttals of using Mictrends in political campaigning.

Penn’s critics often fear that his goal is to undermine broad progressive political themes by encouraging an unprincipled slicing and dicing of the electorate to identify various swing targets. But there’s nothing inherently wrong with understanding the electorate in all its complexity, and forswearing microanalysis guarantees willful ignorance but does not guarantee a macropolitics of progressive principle.

I’m calling for Obama to be the Democrat nominee for race. Heck, if the TV stations can call it, why can’t a blog? Especially after last night’s rout, which I stayed up all night to watch and glee over.
Check the math:

There are only six contests remaining in the Democratic primary calendar and only 217 pledged delegates left to be awarded. Only 7 percent of the pledged delegates remain on the table. There are 260 remaining undeclared superdelegates, for a total of 477 delegates left to be awarded.
With North Carolina and Indiana complete, Barack Obama only needs 172 total delegates to capture the Democratic nomination. This is only 36 percent of the total remaining delegates
…
Since February 5, the Obama campaign has netted 107 superdelegates, and the Clinton campaign only 21. Since the Pennsylvania primary, much of it during the challenging Rev. Wright period, we have netted 24 and the Clinton campaign 17.

If all this is gobbledegook to you, don’t worry about it. The point is, Obama is home free. He is the man. And I’m gonna book a ticket to the US for October to work for his campaign. I need more political experience. Who’s coming with me?

This is a guest article by Genevieve Maitland Hudson

In a recent article for the Guardian’s Comment is Free pages I questioned the way in which nationalism is being used to give rhetorical power to environmental politics and I was surprised by the vehemence of some of the blog responses. I think those responses means the subject is worth a little continued exploration and Pickled Politics seems like an ideal venue.

In the article I outlined why I was bothered – I am bothered – by the way in which certain writers have recently begun celebrating localism as ‘really’ English. By doing this these writers and activists inevitably set up an all too familiar dichotomy according to which some cultural phenomena are truly English and others are not.

This is a problem for the same old reasons it has been a problem in the past, because once you hit on your definition of ‘real’ Englishness you place those aspects of national life that are not to your taste outside the sphere of acceptable behaviour.

I think that so far this trend has been tolerable to the left because the phenomena which have been excluded are unpalatable to liberal sensibilities; they include supermarkets, industrial farming and chain stores. But isn’t the desire to define Englishness a problem in and of itself? Isn’t it even more of a problem when it is yoked so explicitly to rural tradition? After all, most of us are not rural, nor are our lifestyles recognisably traditional and I for one see no particular reason why they should be.

England is a country with a wide variety of inhabitants of different backgrounds, different faiths, ethnicities, religions and so on but also of sensibilities, views, likes and dislikes and of course shopping and cooking habits. To what extent do we need to think about these habits in nationalist terms? And what are the consequences of doing so?

I would argue that we take a risk in equating environmental choices with nationalist commitment, and that the risk far outweighs the benefits. Talking about Englishness is one thing, an ongoing national conversation can be a positive means of creating, and re-creating, civic bonds and of broadening, changing and deepening our sense of what being English is about, but settling on a fixed conclusion is quite another.

When it comes to Englishness, it’s the journey that really matters, not arriving at a fixed and firmly sign-posted destination.

Genevieve Maitland Hudson is an academic and writer employed at the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris and Birkbeck College in London.

I know Sunny doesn’t want anymore posts which give fuel to the Tories about Brown but this shouldn’t be ignored. A new poll has found that even Labour voters (see it’s not just normal people) want him gone. Sensing perhaps a better future without him 55% want him to resign:

More than a half of Labour supporters believe that Gordon Brown should stand down to make way for a more electable alternative.

Today’s Populus poll for The Times — the first survey since last Thursday’s local elections — shows a dramatic collapse of confidence in Mr Brown’s leadership.

The Prime Minister’s personal rating has dropped sharply, along with that for Labour. He now trails David Cameron and Nick Clegg in the leadership stakes.

So, the public voting last week shows great distaste for Dear Leader, his backbenchers are feeling troubled, even some of his ministers are talking behind his back and now his own loyal voters have given their two cents.

Can Brown really last a year of this?

The Pakistani government and the CIA have forced local villagers in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) to effectively abandon their traditional game of yak polo (an important source of income), because the game takes place near a CIA listening post:

Officials want to deter foreigners from visiting the area which Russia and Britain sparred over during the 19th century “Great Game” of imperial expansion. “We will have all the same activities but in a more secure place,” said Syed Aqil Shah, the province’s minister for tourism.

But locals, who come from Pakistan’s poor, semi-nomadic Wakhi people, have complained that the move would entail herding dozens of yaks over a glacier and the 15,000ft Darkhot Pass in the Hindu Kush to Gilgit, a land alien to the Wakhi. A local dignitary, who asked not to be named, said the move had “caused local anger and threatened the Wakhi’s only source of income”.

The New York Times reports:

More than two decades after President Ronald Reagan escalated the war on drugs, arrests for drug sales or, more often, drug possession are still rising. And despite public debate and limited efforts to reduce them, large disparities persist in the rate at which blacks and whites are arrested and imprisoned for drug offenses, even though the two races use illegal drugs at roughly equal rates.
…
“The way the war on drugs has been pursued is one of the biggest reasons for the growing racial disparities in criminal justice over all,” said Ryan S. King, a policy analyst with the Sentencing Project, who wrote its report, which focuses on the differential arrest rates, not only between races but also among cities around the country. Some cities pursue urban, minority drug use far more intensively than do others.

Does anyone know of a similar London based report? If Boris is serious about tackling murders in London, then he may also want to look at this intriguing NYT feature on how some people set about to stop murders in Chicago.

I have a short article in the Media supplement of today’s Guardian.
The full article, before it was edited down, can be read below the fold:

So, Rupa Huq isn’t too impressed by Ruth Fowler’s article stating that she “had a thing for Asian boys”. A few people emailed me after Ruth’s piece and said omg wasn’t it offensive? I didn’t think so. Partly, the thing is that Ruth Fowler wants to be talked about so I doubt she’s too fussed about Rupa’s accusations. (I can somewhat relate to that - I even went on my Facebook hategroup and told them they needed to bump up the numbers!). In the modern age, the more haters you have the more fun it is.

But. There is a danger, when talking about race and religion and even feminism, that people take offence too easily. This is destructive. I’m not sure what Rupa’s argument is - I’m sure she’ll explain herself below soon enough - because initially it’s about how Ruth Fowler has a bit a colonial hangover and then its about not recognising the diversity amongst British Asians. On the latter, I think white people are getting the hang of it - its the brown people who are more guilty of perpetuating it. During the mayoral race we saw Muslim groups pretending that all Muslims behaved the same and would march to the ballot box and ensure Boris wouldn’t be let in. We know how that turned out.

Was Ruth Fowler being patronising when she said she liked Asian boys? Let’s throw away the assumption this is only one way. People of all races find those others ‘exotic’ and sometimes want them on that basis. Not all the time, but it does happen. Asian ‘boys’ are no different. Asian women aren’t any different. So if a white girl says that about a brown guy, its colonial… and if a brown boy says that about a white or black girl… does it became reverse-colonialism? C’mon now! This is a new generation and I think its time to lay the orientalism crap to rest… or leave it to the Daily Express.

Now - about the title of this post. The question posed was a long-running joke among us barficulture regulars (when I used to spend more time running it) because so many Asian guys came on and asked it. After a while we just made fun of them. (The other long-running joke question was: Do girls find guys with turbans attractive? Heh).
I’ve known Asian girls with a preference for black guys because they saw them as more virile and women with a preference for white guys because they came without the cultural baggage.

You know what - it’s a free world. People get too uptight about these things. Don’t get mad, get laid! That’s my pearl of wisdom this bank holiday weekend.

I love this parody… happy bank holiday weekend!

Ken Livingstone’s concession speech impressed many, including me. Despite his many failings, he clearly cares about London, and I hope that he stands again in 2012. Some on the left could learn from his dignified exit, as numerous left-wing commentators have turned their scorn on the great unwashed for daring to vote for someone the great and good disapproved of. DonaldS over at Liberal Conspiracy even suggests that Boris Johnson wasn’t the choice of Londoners because the outlying boroughs don’t really count as London. Was this a case of sour grapes? Yes, but he still made a good point.

I live in Greater London, but not the central bit, and the idea that I am a Londoner doesn’t really appeal to me. I voted in the London elections, but I think that I, and many others in the outlying areas, would be happiest if we were simply cut off from mayoral control. Under Ken Livingstone, it seemed as if the only London that mattered was the inner bit, yet the rest of us were still paying for it. Gretaer London is too large an entity for most people to develop an affinity with it, so Boris Johnson’s first order of business should be to set us free, even if that dooms him in four years’ time.

I only wish British Muslims (and other brown Britons) were this politically astute. Asim Siddiqui has written this article on CIF pointing out how the Muslims4Ken made things worse for Ken Livingstone.

Whilst Muslim lobby groups are to be commended for encouraging Muslim Londoners to register, vote and take part in the democratic process, we need to ask whether their strategy of campaigning for the “Muslim vote” backfired? Did it play directly into the hands of Ken’s adversaries in attempting to smear Ken by association and mobilising otherwise apathetic surburban Londoners to come out for Boris?
…
The last time I recall the “Muslim vote” being mobilised so counter-productively was in the US during the 2000 presidential elections when American Muslims were urged to vote for George W Bush (against Al Gore and Joe Lieberman). It was felt that an Al Gore victory, coupled with an assassin’s bullet, would leave a Jewish, and presumed pro-Israel candidate, as president. Instead, they got Bush and Cheney! How’s that for a counterproductive strategy?

Spot on! Asim adds to this:

Muslim lobbyists, by trying to put all their eggs in Ken’s basket, had no Plan B. Other minorities showed greater political nuance. I saw no JewsforBoris or GaysforBrian campaigns, for example. We were never voting for the mayor of Jerusalem

Well, we did have ‘Progressives for against Ken’, another immature campaign. Harry’s Place, who were a leading proponent of this strategy, don’t know what to say now that Boris is in power. C’mon guys, no champagne bottles being popped? I thought you’d be ecstatic that Boris the Tory was in power? It was obvious by the last week the choice was only between Ken and Boris. If you want Ken out then you must not have a problem with Boris coming in, right? Apparently not.

That stupid letter was among the worst things to befall Ken Livingstone. If you can’t frikking mobilise your vote because you don’t have real grassroots pull, as neither Anas Altkriti nor Azzam Tamimi did, then there’s no point helping the opposition. Boris should thank these two and the MCB for the letter.

Richard Barnbrook, a BNP councillor, has won a seat in the London assembly after the BNP passed the 5% threshold. This is a shame in a number of ways, yet there are still some positives to be taken from it.

Tensions over immigration are running higher than before, whether it is to do with jobs, crime or public services. There are some parts of London, like Barking and Dagenham, which have become a haven for the BNP. Despite all this though, the BNP’s voteshare hardly increased, rising from 4.71% in 2004 to 5.33%. The number of votes did rise from 90,365 to 130,714, but part of that can be accounted for by higher turnout. Nor could the BNP even win one seat in the assembly under the first-past-the-post system, having to rely on the London-wide top-up system instead. In the mayoral elections, Boris Johnson received more than sixteen times the number of votes than the BNP mayoral candidate did. People might be discontented, but they aren’t flocking to the BNP just yet.

… ha ha! Oh boy, I wish I could spend some time taking apart the dynamics of mixed-race relationships. Anyway, Ruth Fowler has this article on comment is free which starts with, “I have a thing for Asian boys.” Is that Asian boys or Asian men?

Anyway, this reminds me of Sathnam Sanghera’s book again. He’s writing this postcard to his ex-girlfriend:

Labour are getting a battering at the polls, the biggest losses in 40 years. Full coverage with a useful table of results on the BBC here.

BBC research suggests Labour won 24% of votes cast in England and Wales, behind the Tories on 44% and Lib Dems on 25%.

So far Labour has lost 177 councillors and key councils like Reading. Tory gains include Bury and North Tyneside.

Mr Brown insists his party will learn lessons. David Cameron called it a “big moment” for the Conservative Party.[Via BBC News online]

London results aren’t announced until early evening but until then consider this the Election results open thread for comments, predications, speculation on Brown/Labour’s future, wild accusations and gloating!

I wrote a few weeks ago about the dominance of identity politics in the American elections… I said at the time that the fight between Clinton and Obama was starting a split between race and gender activists. There’s a brilliant article in the American liberal magazine The Nation this week.

Betsy Reed says that while the Clinton have used the race card throughout the elections, Obama has avoided using the gender card to cast a shadow over Hillary Clinton. Her point is that by giving legitimacy to the American system, whereby coded euphemisms are used to cast a shadow over any non-White Anglo-Saxon Protestant candidate, she makes life in politics more difficult for people of colour and women.

There’s a good article on the Guardian blog about the lack of Asian artists at the Loe Music Hate Racism festival. I saw this mentioned somewhere else too, but can’t remember it now.

MIA is of course fantabulous, but they missed out Bishi. I would have gone to see her.

Phrases are often misused by those who do not understand their origins. ‘Midas touch’ exemplifies this trend. Nowadays it is used to describe someone for whom everything is going right. Gordon Brown is often held to have the opposite of the Midas touch, as everything he comes into contact with goes wrong (from sporting events to budgets). This misses the point of the mythological Midas story though, and the true meaning of the ‘Midas touch’ is of a gift that turned into a curse. It is meant to be a cautionary tale.

King Midas once entertained and sheltered a friend of Dionysus’ (who was the god of wine). As a thank you, Dionysus offered to grant Midas one wish; Midas wished that anything he touched would turn to gold. Dionysus reluctantly agreed, and Midas went merrily round turning everything into gold. But when he sat down to eat, Midas found that the food he picked up turned to gold, while the water and wine he tried to pour down his throat become liquid gold as soon as it touched his lips. Soon he was hungry and thirsty, and was willing to trade all his gold for some bread and water. Eventually Dionysus took pity on him, and told him how to get rid of the ‘Midas touch’. Midas later became a hippy.

Shariq, Sid and I ended up at the BMSD launch today… where Inayat Bunglawala of the MCB, Yasmin Albhai-Brown, Ed Husain and Usama Hasan (former jihadi, now also working with Quilliam Foundation) were speaking.

It was a bit of a boring discussion in front of a very expectant audience because basically everyone agreed that Islam was compatible with democracy and the best system for Muslims etc. Yada yada. But c’mon, hardly getting to the nub of the problem was it? Here are three immediate thoughts:

Boy, I think this was my toughest article on comment is free. It took so much re-wording that my head was hurting last night.

Anyway, following the controversy over Rev Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama, I thought i’d make a broader point about the dynamics with minority communities on “speaking out” and raising your head above the parapet etc.

What I like about Obama is that the man has to walk a very difficult tightrope. The Clintons and Republicans are doing everything to make it about his race, in coded terms (how patriotic are you really??), while Obama has to sit there and take it. He can’t acknowledge that shit because as soon as he does, they’ll just brand him a whiny black man complaining about racism. Its just not the done thing when you want to transcend race.

Anyway, here’s the article…

Karl Rove has written an homage to John McCain in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal. As far as the election goes, Rove and the GOP frontrunner can now be said to be in a sweet and tender embrace.

But as the First Post has it:

This is despite the fact that Rove was reportedly one of the team behind a vicious smear campaign to discredit McCain before the South Carolina primaries eight years ago. There, someone involved with the Bush campaign instigated a series of telephone calls in which Republican voters were asked whether they would be more or less likely to vote for McCain if they knew he’d “fathered an illegitimate black child”.

Don’t forget to vote Sian Berry 1 and Ken Livingstone tomorrow people! Dave Hill has put together ten good reasons why.

He also has an amusing video from Ken’s campaigning in Southall on his blog.

Update: Just saw this piece in the Guardian where Andrew Gilligan is squirming all over the place in defence of Boris Johnson

According to the Indy blog, three people were picked up yesterday, suspected of funding or helping the LTTE (aka Tamil Tigers).