No further counterarguments relating to the on-topic points Ravi

Jai, I am sure you – as well as I – appreciate Desi’s comments, and I think everyone here is satisfied that we can agree to disagree without prolonging and repeating the same arguments ad nauseam.

Why do you get so wired up over comments on a blog?

Not wired up at all, I just asked a simple question requesting you to clarify the meaning of your somewhat confusing remark.

Don’t you exhaust yourself by getting indignant over every single thing, even if something is a joke?

Unlike your own extensive history of calm, measured, objective commenting on this blog, of course.

And yes, I’d laugh if someone said “Ummah Power” if I knew they were joking, which is clear from my own comment.

Yes…..I’m sure you would

And yes, I’d laugh if someone said “Ummah Power” if I knew they were joking, which is clear from my own comment.

Jai 179:

You know I was kidding, right?

Nice attempt at a deflection, Desi, but it still didn’t answer my question.

In any case, we can all hope that you will maintain your sense of humour if anyone here makes a similarly flippant off-topic “joke” about “Ummah Power” in response to any posts by a commenter who happens to be Muslim.

There should indeed be a more open, widespread and formal acknowledgement of the realities of colonial expansion on the American continent and the impact this had on groups already living there; but this does not mean it would be appropriate or sensitive for anyone to (for example) criticise commemorations focusing solely on MLK or the black Civil Rights movement (and not simultaneously dealing with the trauma suffered by Native Americans, or indeed other civil/human rights movements around the world), any more than it would be appropriate or sensitive for anyone to criticise Jewish groups and Europeans as a whole for having a day focusing predominantly on the atrocities in WW2.

It’s not an either/or situation. You can have separate memorials without interfering with (or criticising) those that already exist.

Totally agree here. But I was talking about Europe since we are talking about Europe. To make myself clear, I’m not taking the “blame whitey” route. Obviously, mass killings have happened by non white perpetrators (Sikhs and Gujarati Muslims).

If one is going to use the subcontinent as an example, and (in post #201) state the importance of any particular group being aware of their own history and “being fair about it” — which is a completely correct point, in the interests of maintaining intellectual and moral honesty — then it is also worth remembering that, historically, Sikhs and Muslims (Gujarati or otherwise) have not been the only victims of mass atrocities by non-white perpetrators in that region of the world. This doesn’t just apply to the horrific events of Partition, although that’s a pertinent example. If one is going to emphasise the necessity for an acknowledgement of some of the nastier aspects of European history — especially during the colonial period — then bear in mind that aggression and brutality in the name of imperialism was not a purely European vice.

It is critical to be completely honest and even-handed about this, and not have any double-standards.

In any case I was not just talking about the subcontinent in my previous post, but was referring to the fact that massacres of the “locals” and atrocities committed in the name of territorial expansion have also occurred throughout large swathes of the rest of the world inhabited by non-white peoples, and that perhaps this should also be properly acknowledged and commemorated by everyone concerned. Assuming that the rationale for criticising Europeans in this matter equally applies to everyone else too, and also assuming that this will not be used as an excuse to maintain a grudge against the perceived descendants of the aggressors and used as a metaphorical stick with which to beat them.

European Jews are no more special than North Africans and Native Americans getting killed, their deaths deserve to remembered as well. And if commemoration is simply a perfunctory exercise w/r/t to bringing up the genocide of non Euros by Euros, then I ask why it should be important we should remember the Shoah.

I think you should stop being patronising, and assume that disagreeing with your position means I do not understand what you are writing. I just think you are framing your argument the wrong way.

To start with, it is the Jewish people – not the Europeans – who organise the Holocaust memorials, and ensure that it is not forgotten. If not for them, it would probably be another date and event. So your rant against European’s lack of attention to other attrocities makes little sense to me.

And you do not have to repeat everything again.

“You are the one who started talking specifically about Europe – and since you are complaining that other genocides are not given as much coverage as the Holocaust, it is a valid question, in my view, to ask why atrocities committed by non-Europeans should not be covered as well. Otherwise, it sounds… a bit RACIST and… euro-centric, no?”

See my comment #156: “I know I used the word “racism,” but you are right, it is not quite exactly that. There must be another word I’m looking for but it eludes me…anyway, when it comes to me, I’ll post” it.”

And yes, I do think it’s Euro-centric (as I explained my reasoning probably 100 comments back but which you seem to have missed) to talk about a genocide by Europeans carried out on other Europeans, but not talk about the Europeans carrying out genocide against non Europeans. And no, this is not about “blaming whitey” which you and Jai said, it is about discussing things that have been done in a people’s own history [in this case, Europeans] and being fair about it. European Jews are no more special than North Africans and Native Americans getting killed, their deaths deserve to remembered as well. And if commemoration is simply a perfunctory exercise w/r/t to bringing up the genocide of non Euros by Euros, then I ask why it should be important we should remember the Shoah.

Not responding to things that I have already responded to like 50 comments ago, for fear of sounding like a broken record, as Cover Drive mentioned. Thank you.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1121-03.htm

“Does anyone really think that commemorating genocides committed against my own or anyone else’s community is likely to make me more conscious about human rights here and now? Just looking around me, I don’t think it does much, but maybe I am wrong.”

This is a good point, and I do think that “commemorating” isn’t enough, and probably doesn’t do jack shit. What it does, though, is at least hang in the back of people’s head. It might not stop genocide the next time around, but at the same time, I DO think that erasing the massacres of others from collective imaginings is worse. Barely anyone here [in the US] thinks of what happened to the Natives as “genocide” (unless you are politically active). Here in the US, we definitely DO NOT discuss the extermination of entire peoples in North America as much as we discuss the Holocaust.

“You’re beginning to sound like a broken record now.”

Because commentators keep fucking asking me to repeat what I’ve already said!! See comments #146 and #196. I understand that it’s impossible to read the entire thread and we usually jump in midway and then comment, and I’ve done this more than once, but sheesh.

“You are the one who started talking specifically about Europe – and since you are complaining that other genocides are not given as much coverage as the Holocaust, it is a valid question, in my view, to ask why atrocities committed by non-Europeans should not be covered as well.”

No offense yaar, but it’s really trying to sometimes respond to you– often you are looking for things to swoop down and attack without even really thinking about it. Is this not a UK site? Are we not talking about commemoration in the UK? Hence, I brought up other atrocities that should be discussed, IMO. And Don said that the Holocaust hits people home harder and its more discussed because it’s something that happened in Europe, and someone else mentioned that it was done by Europeans, and it shows how evil can be done, blah blah blah and my response was that if we’re going to talk about atrocities by Europeans, then why not discuss what Europeans did to others?

Why do I have to spend time writing a comment explaining to you what is already found above?

That is nice, thanks for the compliment!

“Lara Croft is the heroine in ‘Tomb Raider’ She can kick ass.”

Oh…thank God it’s not someone like Anne Coulter

“Valid point and one I support wholeheartedly, but in that case perhaps we should also have a memorial or large scale recognition of the slaughter of the “natives” whenever there was an invasion by non-Europeans in other parts of the world.

As long as we can also set aside a separate day to talk about and remember the non-white folks that have also been on the receiving end of extreme aggression and conquest by other non-white folks.”

Totally agree here. But I was talking about Europe since we are talking about Europe. To make myself clear, I’m not taking the “blame whitey” route. Obviously, mass killings have happened by non white perpetrators (Sikhs and Gujarati Muslims).

You know I was kidding, right?

I always find it worrying when you start by saying you don’t excuse such and such behaviour then go onto defend it.

Surely if something is wrong – it is wrong no matter which side does it.

Could the other side then not say that they are getting in revenge for you not wanting to be first!

It is surely just a vicious circle and the results are exactly what we see.

Surely people should say something is wrong and not make excuse for such behaviour.

In this case then are the kids who threw stones not getting in their revenge first as well?!

Throwing the stones is wrong and the actions of both sides in the Middle Eats is wrong. We should stand up and be counted and say so.

An abuser is an abuser even if they have been abused first.