Pickled Politics






  • Family

    • Clairwil
    • Daily Rhino
    • Katy Newton
    • Leon Green
    • Sajini W
    • Sid's blog
    • Sonia Afroz
    • Sunny on CIF
  • Comrades

    • Aqoul
    • Blairwatch
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Butterflies & Wheels
    • Catalyst magazine
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Clive Davis
    • Comment is Free
    • Curious Hamster
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Derek Wall
    • Dr StrangeLove
    • Eteraz: States of Islam
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feministing
    • Harry's Place
    • Indigo Jo
    • Liberal England
    • Liberal Review
    • Matt Murrell
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Humanist Editor
    • New Statesman blogs
    • open Democracy
    • Robert Sharp
    • Septicisle
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy's Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Tasneem Khalil
    • The Other India
    • The Sharpener
    • The UK Today
    • Tim Worstall
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Desi Pundit
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Isheeta
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Real man's fraternity
    • Route 79
    • Sakshi Juneja
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Smalltown Scribbles
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Turban Head
    • Ultrabrown





  • Site Meter

    Technorati: graph / links

    … and how we get there


    by Sunny on 12th May, 2006 at 9:55 pm    

    In my previous post I laid out a need for us on Pickled Politics to use this as a space to rigorously champion the causes of liberalism and progressive action and thought.

    We do this not because we are self-hating Asians (though no doubt many may be thinking this but haven’t yet emailed me to say so, disappointly) but because we deeply care for our “community”.

    This is where it gets complicated. I care about everyone, regardless of race, religion, caste or nationality. As an Indian I even unashamedly care for my Pakistani brothers and sisters (and ex-girlfriends). See, that wasn’t difficult to say.

    But there are ‘issues’ that we have to take ownership of within the Asian community. And only we can take ownership of them because it is not for the government to do it. By that I mean educational under-achievement, forced marriages, sexual abuse etc - the list is long.

    One of the new aspects to this Pickled Politics v.2 will be pages dedicating to ‘watching’ various groups that we see as communal and bigoted. At the same time we need to put together solid arguments and essays related to different issues, which can be referenced later when necessary. And find ways of building together campaigns around issues too. Any thoughts on this will be great.

    But more than that - we have to be positive and all-embracing. As many of you said in my previous post, we cannot just keep repeating what we are against, we also have to openly state what we are for.

    This is important because most bigots thrive on hating others and looking down on them. We need to avoid that. We need to not only be positive but provide hope that it is possible.

    This is not just an idle project. There is indeed a grand plan to all this, though I can’t reveal it just as yet.



    Print this page and comments   |     |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: Uncategorized




    64 Comments below   |  

    1. Rohin — on 12th May, 2006 at 10:41 pm  

      “I even unashamedly care for my Pakistani brothers and sisters (and ex-girlfriends)”

      You care for your ex-girlfriends? Here is where we part ways.

    2. squared — on 12th May, 2006 at 11:27 pm  

      Aww sunny you’re such a hippy and we love you for it. :)

    3. Justforfun — on 12th May, 2006 at 11:41 pm  

      “I even unashamedly care for my Pakistani brothers and sisters (and ex-girlfriends)”

      You care for your ex-girlfriends? Here is where we part ways. I made sure ALL were unpleasant breakups, it’s more fun.

      LOL - but Sunny’s pet bunny is still alive.

      Justforfun

    4. sunray — on 13th May, 2006 at 12:22 am  

      “This is where it gets complicated. I care about everyone, regardless of race, religion, caste or nationality.”

      “But there are ‘issues’ that we have to take ownership of within the Asian community. And only we can take ownership of them because it is not for the government to do it. By that I mean educational under-achievement, forced marriages, sexual abuse, BBC Asian Network etc - the list is long.”

    5. Refresh — on 13th May, 2006 at 1:18 am  

      Sunny, I am not sure PP has got past the patronising phase. There is a danger that PP becomes self-serving, as there isn’t yet the understanding about how the groups that PP intends to tackle have worked to support Asians (and I don’t mean the goatee bearded innits) in general.

    6. Jay Singh — on 13th May, 2006 at 1:18 am  

      LoL @ Rohin

      Sunny you’re a saint, ex-girlfriends he even cares for.

    7. squared — on 13th May, 2006 at 2:20 am  

      HAHA @ sunray’s edit.

      I spent ages sitting there thinking why on Earth did he randomly copy and paste 2 sections without any comment?

      And then I realised… Awww poor sunray and his lifelong battle with BBC Asian Network. :P

    8. Sunny — on 13th May, 2006 at 3:46 am  

      Bloody hell. I shouldn’t have written that quickly before I headed out. It doesn’t even make much sense :(
      Apart from the ex-girlfriends bit. I love all of them :D

    9. Steve M — on 13th May, 2006 at 9:28 am  

      I sat next to Mother Theresa on a bus once (at New Delhi or Calcutta airport - it was 4.00 in the morning, I forget).

      Can’t imagine why I’m mentioning this now. :-d

    10. Katy Newton — on 13th May, 2006 at 10:01 am  

      It’s always difficult to set out abstract aims (cf Euston). I think most people tend to agree on abstract aims (end poverty/ improve education/ racism bad, etc), it’s the concrete means that cause dissent. It’s why you get a much better idea of what people are like when you discuss specific issues.

    11. John Browne — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:15 am  

      Sunny
      You said: “causes of liberalism and progressive action and thought.”

      I know I keep banging on about Wishy Washy UK Christian Culture but it is a key (the UK key) to liberalism. Even non-Christains who know the stories can see the whole sub-text of the Gospels was Anti-Religion (eg working on Holy days, anti-priests, eating what you want, doing what you want). The Gospel is the basis of liberalism. Its difficult to be liberal AND non-Christian religious, that is your problem.

      The earliest known Christian document is the letter to the Galatians (central asian Turkey). It was written about 48AD (15 years after Jesus). Its just FIVE PAGES long. In it the WHOLE Christian message is laid out. I like this line: “I went immediately to Arabia” and this line “See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand”. I recommend people who come to the UK read these five pages so at least they can understand the liberal culture they are going to. Why do we eat pork and drink beer and don’t act religious…. Its all laid out in those five pages written in 48AD.

      John

    12. Katy Newton — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:37 am  

      I’m a liberal non-Christian. It’s easy.

    13. Jai — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:51 am  

      The United States is far more “Christian” than the UK in terms of genuine “believers”, but it’s one of the most liberal countries on the planet.

      Being liberal and religious aren’t necessarily mutually-exclusive — it depends on the tenets of the specific religion itself. Not all organised religions are as narrowly-conservative in their core values as one may think.

    14. Chairwoman — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:52 am  

      John doesn’t sound very liberal to me. He sounds as though he wants everybody to do it his way.

      And I don’t thinks he’s Frank Sinatra.

    15. Katy Newton — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:55 am  

      Jai - I would say it’s less about the religion itself and more about your attitude to people who don’t do it. Most religions, including Christianity, can be and have been interpreted both very very narrowly and conservatively and very very liberally. But even if you yourself choose to follow your religion very strictly, that doesn’t, or shouldn’t, stop you from being liberal towards others. For example, John refers to not eating pork: it isn’t really about eating pork or not eating pork, it’s about how those who don’t eat pork react to those who do, and vice versa.

    16. Jai — on 13th May, 2006 at 12:09 pm  

      Katy, you’re right, but my point was that some religions do explictly state tolerance towards those who may not share one’s beliefs (unless their actions are deliberately malicious towards an innocent third-party, for example).

      But your own point is excellent and well-said.

    17. John Browne — on 13th May, 2006 at 12:35 pm  

      Chairwoman,
      You said:

      John doesn’t sound very liberal to me. He sounds as though he wants everybody to do it his way.
      And I don’t thinks he’s Frank Sinatra.

      I don’t want everyone to be like me. I do like people being conservative, liberal, communist, and even very religious. What I am trying to point out (in a crass way) is that UK Liberalism (and western Liberalism generally) comes to us via the Gospel message.

      My question is can you be a devout Muslim or Hindu and be a liberal progressive (Liberal in the sense of eating anything, wearing anything or nothing, women bishops, gay clergy) because at the heart of liberalism is a freedom of expression to be yourself and a desire to set everyone else free too.

    18. soru — on 13th May, 2006 at 1:35 pm  

      There’s some stuff I learnt from looking into Christianist/Dominionist/Theonomist theology, which is all the Abrahamic religions seem to have three categories of laws:

      1. ritual (primarily affects yourself only, e.g. don’t eat pork or beef (is there any religion that outlaws chicken?)).
      2. moral (affects the people you directly come into contact with, e.g. marriage, divorce, paternity).
      3. civil (affects society as a whole, e.g don’t litter, or rebel).

      The Theonomists claim that Christ said ‘the _ritual_ laws no longer apply, but not the other two’. As a non-theologist, I get the impression that they have a pretty strong case on purely scriptual grounds, which would mean the Bible calls for a theocracy. Luckily, not many people know this.

      A lot of religiously-oriented politics can be understood through that framework:

      Most non-Christian religions have _ritual_ laws, if they have any.

      One meaning of liberalism is, in a sentence, about seperating the _moral_ and the _civil_ laws. You can be a bad bad person in a tabloid/soap opera sense, and not get arrested. Depending on how tight the community is, you might get ‘looks’ in the street, or shunned.

      Obviously, no real society is completely liberal, there’s always some influence of morality on the laws.

      Religious conservatism is about the opposite of the above, about wanting more morality in law, for the bad to be punished and the good rewarded, according to a particular view of what is good and bad.

      Finally, Multiculturalism is about taking the slightly different views of good and bad that different cultures have, and wanting them to be simultaneously and equally enforced.

    19. Chairwoman — on 13th May, 2006 at 1:47 pm  

      John Browne

      We obviously have different ideas about what constitutes liberalism. Mine is very simple, as long as no harm is done, I’ll stand in my corner doing my thing, whilst you stand in yours doing yours, and they stand in their corners doing their things. We can all meet in the middle, smile, talk, and agree to be different.

    20. Benjamin — on 13th May, 2006 at 2:11 pm  

      Sunny

      Got any dough for your grand plans, old boy?

    21. Benjamin — on 13th May, 2006 at 2:14 pm  

      How can one contribute financially?

    22. John Browne — on 13th May, 2006 at 2:25 pm  

      Chairwoman,
      I have nothing against people being devout muslims or hindus. However I would not be happy if I lived in a country where they controlled paraliament.

      Please read the 5 pages of Galatians …. it goes like this “….the law, introduced 430 years later….blah blah blah….” It also mentions that you should not let people who are of the “law” rule over you. Its a warning to us to hold firm to liberalism and progressiveness… Its easily taken away.

      John

    23. Sunny — on 13th May, 2006 at 2:50 pm  

      There can be liberal and devout people, as Rowan Williams is IMO. But given the nature of religious politics, it is unsurprising that the conservative usually get to the top in that realm.

      John - I don’t really want to get into a debate about how liberalism came from the gospel though. There have been plenty of eras in Indian history too where societies were much more liberal than they are now. See Abraham Eraly’s “Gem in the Lotus”. The correlation (or lack of) between religion and developing openly and liberal ideas is a seperate discussion though.

      Benjamin - err thanks for the offer. I believe we are ok for now, and I don’t really want to solicit money if I don’t know what project to use it for (yet). When the time comes then we may ask readers to help if possible.

    24. Roger — on 13th May, 2006 at 3:05 pm  

      “I have nothing against people being devout muslims or hindus. However I would not be happy if I lived in a country where they controlled paraliament.”…or devout anythings.

    25. Don — on 13th May, 2006 at 3:51 pm  

      John,

      While some aspects of Galatians do urge a less exclusivist approach to religious fellowship, the first salient point is to damn all those who might present a different argument;

      1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

      The argument that liberalism (and indeed ‘The Enlightenment’, however defined) is a product of christianity is a familiar one and I don’t buy it. Probably not the place to discuss it here.

      I think I get what you mean by ‘wishy-washy’ christianity in the UK, but that was less a working out of inherent liberal values within the bible and more a reaction to centuries of bloody religious strife tearing the country apart. After the break with Rome the English church had to evolve a new identity and - fortunately - evolved one based on avoiding conflict and intransigent dogma.

    26. Benjamin — on 13th May, 2006 at 3:57 pm  

      Sunny

      If you want any money you got my email address.

      I will see what I can do via paypal, credit card etc.

    27. Sunny — on 13th May, 2006 at 4:17 pm  

      Thanks for the Benjamin, much appreciated.

    28. Nyrone — on 13th May, 2006 at 4:19 pm  

      Words…..are worthless.
      Chest-thumping gung-ho collectivism fuels nothing but the Ego. Media interest and current affairs become hobbies and escapism for the souls with small brains who impose their opinions on the rest of the free world, while the indecisive free-thinkers get shot down as unsure, soft and uncertain. What was our crime? denying the materialistic beautiful imprisonment of this solid gold cage unto us? Was it so wrong for us to look for ways of getting out of the traps that are immigrant parents got stuck in? Why are we percievied as childish for asking questions about why the distribution of wealth in this world is so uneven when there remains enough food to feed ever single person? Why is it naieve to ask how the poor got so poor? Bloody priests and Imams never answer that question…Why ARE the rich so rich? How did it get this way? What traits led to this reality? . Social justice? Who has the time? The world says ‘become hard, get a tough shell or you’re fucked’
      and all our educational institutions that are feeding us rubbish…why are we going to school? So we can grow up to fit into this sick, hellish society that practically rewards acts of evil? So we can fit into all this madness? Do you want to become a cog in this wheel? Tell children to get an education? Why, so they can grow up to be like that mass-child murderer Tony Blair? I’m becoming more lost in the futility of it all. Do children know how hard it’s going to be for them? Maybe we should warn them…tell them not to bother growing up, because it all gets fucked up when you see the hypocicy and oceans of lies with your own eyes…It makes you want to become numb to it all.

      …and that’s practically what we’ve done anyway.
      We are as numb as fuck from this tirade of abuse.
      I’ve just finished 4 months of international development in a rural tribal Indian village 5 hours in the mountains disconnected from everyone and everything. Nobody gives a flying fuck about these people? They just suffer the same indignity day after day as the philosopher/idealists just sit in their rooms wanking themselves off. Does that sound harsh? Well, I can see that you are offended by this. If you are, query into your own de-senzitization of human life. Live in self-delusion all you like, the numbers of dead roll in and we all barely bat an eyelid. If there is a question we must ask ourselves, it’s how the hell this could have happened….that even reading about some news agenda-led phoney-baloney bleeding hearts tragedy in the congo, we begin to feel less and less.

      Sorry, I know this is probably way off topic and I’m ranting like a madman, but I need to pierce a whole in this issue and make my contribution the only way I feel like at this moment in time.
      It’s easy to point, critizise and write about all the ‘bad’ stuff that going on in the world, the question is…what are you going to do about it?
      Really? and dont give me that ‘raising awareness’ crap so you can sharpen your typing and english lit skills on your keyboard at home sipping a cuppa in this giant recreational playground you spend time in to escape what’s going on in your heart when you go outside. What are you practically going to do about it? As human beings, we don’t exist in the blogsphere, we live in the real world and despite all this drivel of ‘making a change and living in a better world that is pure verbalism personified’ You and I ARE the world. We have to sit up and practically graft real soloutions in each other’s company, because WE are this world, and we need to figure out the answers to the simple questions and issues like how come it’s so difficult to practise what we preach on some blog. Everyone is great and friendly on the net, why is that not repeated in real life? let’s come together and find out.

    29. Nyrone — on 13th May, 2006 at 4:28 pm  

      Everyone wants to change the world, but people are allergic to the notion of changing themselves.
      What happened to self-inquisition? Your responsibility towards what you do with YOUR life is arguably the most pressing issue for you…People are usually looking outside for eternal change but dont want to commit to anything.

      I reckon people only want theoretical change. They want the world around them to change so that they are also altered by proxy in the process.
      Everyone wants change, everyone wants peace, everyone is angry at the ‘evil-doers’ if the religions have been repeating their mantras for years, why doesn’t this world change? All those truths uncovered after Vietnam and My Lai, so how did history repeat itself again? Surely we should be living in a paradise, but we are not…and it doesn’t make sense on paper, but it is understood internally.

      Everything is understood internally.
      Everything we have to do is stirring internally.
      When will it come to frution?
      How will our ideas move off the page
      into the real world?

    30. Don — on 13th May, 2006 at 4:28 pm  

      ‘I can see that you are offended by this’

      ‘query into your own de-senzitization of human life.’

      you’re obviously angry about something, so I’ll limit myself to;

      Who the hell are you talking to? And where did you get the impression that you are the only one who has ever engaged with life outside the comfort zone?

      Calm down, gather your thoughts and get back when you’re feeling more coherent.

    31. John Browne — on 13th May, 2006 at 8:37 pm  

      Don,
      Thankyou for taking the trouble for reading Galatians.

      You read: “1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”

      Now you can see why Holland can be world famous for being a Liberal and Progressive state and at the same time produce Apartied in south Africa and heavy duty racism in Indonesia.

      The Christian gospel (hi lighted in Galatians) is very good at encouraging liberalism to those inside but also intollerance to outsiders.

      It was the Pope in the 1850s that formed the Europe wide Christian Democrat party in an attempt to stop Bismark. This same Catholic party was the main opposition to Hitler in the 1930s elections. It was within a hairs breadth of beating him.

      I can see that Hindu and Muslim religions (unlike Christianity) are aclaimed for being tollerant to outsiders. This is where the world is now.

      The West likes progressive liberalism and the East likes multi-culturalism.

      The west hates multi-culturalism when it gets in the way of liberalism and the east hates behaviour that is perceived to be decadent.

      You can say you are an athiest but we all bring our cultural baggage. Freud was an Austrian athiest who split the human mind into three parts (id, ego and super-ego). These parts do not exist, he just lived in a trinitarian society. The Catholic Church believes in a more or less instantaneous creation thus the “Big Bang” theory of creation of the universe was invented by a Georges Lemaitre in 1933 (A Catholic Priest)… Had he not been a priest this notion might never have been. He was also, of course, a close friend of Einstein (who married a Catholic and then divorced).

      Have you wondered why you want to be Liberal and Progressive? Are you sure you are not simply getting indoctrinated by western culture?

      John

    32. Don — on 13th May, 2006 at 9:12 pm  

      ‘ Are you sure you are not simply getting indoctrinated by western culture?’

      You appear to be under a misaprehension. and just a tiny bit patronising.

      I’m not sure what point you’re making, and I find the Lemaitre para bewildering.

    33. Jai — on 13th May, 2006 at 9:40 pm  

      I don’t want this to be turned into another anti-Muslim thread so I am saying this cautiously — and purely as an academic observation — but John Browne appears to be under a mistaken impression about orthodox Islam if he thinks it encourages diversity and multiculturalism — and as far as I know, it certainly is not “acclaimed for being tolerant to outsiders”.

      It is a different case, of course, with more liberal interpretations of the faith, especially those that lean towards Sufism.

      There are huge differences between the most conservative interpretations of Islam and Hinduism — there is not a homogeneous “Eastern” viewpoint and there never has been, either religiously or culturally.

      John, you appear to have a good knowledge of Christianity in some aspects, but with all due respect, it would be beneficial for you to do some more research on Asian history (and indeed the internal dynamics of present “Eastern” nations) and the major non-Christian religions. Some countries in that part of the world are intrinsically geared towards diversity and multiculturalism (for various reasons), others most certainly are not, and — again — one cannot make generalisations about the region, even though one’s intentions are obviously well-meaning.

    34. Rakhee — on 13th May, 2006 at 10:56 pm  

      Hey Don - although it’s clear to see Nyrone is wound up, perhaps cut a little slack. At least he is passionate enough to speak out openly.

      Nyrone:

      => Words…..are worthless.
      I disagree - words aren’t used in the right way anymore but when they, the impact can be profound.

      =>I’ve just finished 4 months of international development in a rural tribal Indian village 5 hours in the mountains disconnected from everyone and everything

      Would you mind sharing what you were doing there and what for?

      => You and I ARE the world. We have to sit up and practically graft real soloutions

      Agree. On one hand you criticize bloggers, but it’s funny that you have aired your views on PP - the one site where you know people feel passionately about race, politics and asian issues as clearly you do. At the very least, the people on this site are concerned about the issues enough to want to talk about it. Some would say that’s a big step in itself. Also, at least blogging gives an un-regulated way of sharing opinion and it is an (increasingly) influential way of communicating.

      I understand your frustrations. Without giving too much away I recently worked on a project which was about reducing poverty in Asia. I felt the same way you did at the time - stop f**king talking and get on with it.

      I do agree with you on some points, esp that we are responsible for making changes happen. It just isn’t as easy as we’d like it to be.

    35. Rohin — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:04 pm  

      John,

      Where does it say Catholics believe in an instant creation? As I touched upon in other threads, the Christian religion has been responsible for some of the most persistent scientific fallacies. Catholicism itself continues to enforce dogma around the world.

      Lemaître came to the conclusion of the Big Bang based upon general relativity and the Friedmann equations. His religious background was irrelevant - although no one can prove this or disprove it.

      Likewise, Freud’s creation of the three aspects of the mind may not have been influenced by the Holy Trinity, where’s the evidence? (incidentally, he was an Ashkenazi Jew). It is a convenient assertion as again, no proof can be offered. However Freud’s work on the conscious, pre-conscious and unconscious as well as the super ego, ego and id will demonstrate that he simply found there were three discrete elements to the mind. Three is quite a low number. If you go looking for connections, you’ll find them.

      As others have said, ‘the East’ is not an uniform block. Decadence is/was just as rife there as anywhere else in the world, I don’t think ‘the East’ is more opposed to it than elsewhere.

    36. John Browne — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:21 pm  

      Rohin,
      French/Belgium Culture and the “Big Bang”?
      Look at this French picture of the “Big Bang” - 1250AD!!!!

      http://www.aracnet.com/~wpbenz/ImageFilesCom/serpent/BibleMoralisee.jpg

      Freud was certainly a Jew but of course he was bought up in Austria. This is my point.The culture you are IN does influence your subconcious thinking. Why do you want to be a “Liberal Progressive”?

      John

    37. Rohin — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:34 pm  

      I’ve never actually said I do. I don’t really know what those jargonistic words mean, like Morgan Freeman and ‘rehabilitated’. Of course your social milieu affects your subconscious thinking. But why should wanting to be a liberal progressive be due to being in the West? Many liberal progressives live in the East and indeed in quite a few countries they have to have far more courage to say what they think, in comparison to me. There are also right wing conservatives in all countries. I just don’t get what you’re saying. Everyone living in the West is shaped by the same societal influences. Why should we be “getting indoctrinated by western culture”? And by the way, we ARE Western.

    38. Don — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:46 pm  

      John,

      One doesn’t ‘want’ to be a Liberal Progressive. One may acquire over the years a collection of convictions, attitudes, principles. etc., which, for the sake of convenience, one can occassionaly allow to be labeled as such. Why do you keep asking that meaningless question?

      As for the link, I think that’s moving away from the point where we can have a serious conversation.

    39. Amir — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:54 pm  

      One of the new aspects to this Pickled Politics v.2 will be pages dedicating to ‘watching’ various groups that we see as communal and bigoted.

      Does that include Stalin’s…, err, sorry, Lenin’s Tomb?

    40. Rohin — on 13th May, 2006 at 11:57 pm  

      You don’t have to agree with everything a blog says in order to link it Amir, surely you realise that? Because you KEEP asking about Lenin’s Tomb. PP’s blogroll is pretty diverse.

    41. Amir — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:06 am  

      Lenin’s Tomb embodies all the negative traits of communitarian politics. If PP wants to take itself seriously as a ‘progressive’ alternative to the MAB, MAC, RESPECT, etc., then it’s got to start separating the wheat from the chaff.

    42. Rohin — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:20 am  

      Why? Where does it say that sites must only link to other sites that Amir declares acceptable? The only thing that a blog/site/body should be judged upon is its content.

    43. Sunny — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:26 am  

      There’s bits of coverage I like of Lenin’s Tomb, as with others on our blogroll, and there are bits we disagree with, as with others on our blogroll.

      Unless he writes something I consider totally off the charts, the link remains.

    44. Amir — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:39 am  

      Rohin.
      You’re basically saying: Amir, this is an exercise in logic, not guilt by association.

      In the case of individuals, this is no doubt true. For instance: It would be wrong, in my opinion, to disqualify a contributor’s point-of-view, ex hypothesi, because he/she is a Moslem convert, wears a burka, etc.

      With a Web site or political blog or political movement (?), however, it is not the same (i.e. Sunny isn’t just defending his own ego… he’s trying to speak up for a silenced majority of progressive Asians). Thus: A spade is a spade. A comrade is a comrade. It says a lot about the political ‘zeitgeist’.

      Why? Where does it say that sites must only link to other sites that Amir declares acceptable?

      So: Have you guys decided already to ditch the bit about ‘self-criticism’? :-)

    45. Jay Singh — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:45 am  

      Amir, you come across as really pompous and patronising sometimes, like that time when you congratulated me for my blog and said, ‘Well done son’ - you joker!

      Chill bwana and stop being patronising - Sunny keep it in there just to keep Amir itching.

    46. Rohin — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:50 am  

      “So: Have you guys decided already to ditch the bit about ‘self-criticism’?”

      Yes.

      No.

      Maybe.

      People will criticise and I will decide which to listen to. This system is flawless. If you disagree, please raise your hand now. You can speak when I point to you.

    47. Amir — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:56 am  

      Jay,
      ‘Son’ is a new slang word – kinda’ like the Asian equivalent to ‘dude’. No offence intended – honestly. It means ‘one of the lads’,… although, to be fair, I can see how a Sikh warrior could get offended by a young, inexperienced wannabe like myself with no regard for age! :-)

      Amir, you come across as really pompous and patronising sometimes,

      I blame it on the jargon. :-(

    48. Rohin — on 14th May, 2006 at 1:01 am  

      Haha, Amir, he of flighty jargon, explaining ’son’ to Jay. “It means ‘one of the lads’, don’t you know” he said as he lit his pipe and slipped into his smoking jacket. This is priceless.

      Jay, are you familiar with argot such as ‘man’ or ‘dude’. I hear these words have been subverted by the errant youth, how awfully droll.

    49. Jay Singh — on 14th May, 2006 at 1:04 am  

      I believe the adolescents these days invoke such colloquial terms frequently Rohin.

    50. Amir — on 14th May, 2006 at 1:08 am  

      Sorry [blush, blush]
      I haven’t the foggiest who anyone is on this blog:

      Amir, you come across as really pompous and patronising sometimes,

      …And that’s pretty harsh coming from someone who doesn’t know me either.

    51. Jay Singh — on 14th May, 2006 at 1:11 am  

      Alright Amir don’t sweat it - I didn’t mean it.

    52. leon — on 14th May, 2006 at 2:02 am  

      This thread has gone very weird…

    53. John Browne — on 14th May, 2006 at 10:45 am  

      Don,
      The Bible Moralisee is a very famous and ancient picture
      (see Sister Wendeys history of art). It shows the “Cosmic EGG”). Georges Lemaître actually called it the “Cosmic Egg”… Others then renamed it the “Big Bang” as a joke.

      http://www.aracnet.com/~wpbenz/ImageFilesCom/serpent/BibleMoralisee.jpg

      John

    54. Katy Newton — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:10 am  

      *puts head round the door*

      *withdraws hastily to comparable safety of weekend open thread*

    55. Katy Newton — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:11 am  

      argh!

      That should have read:

      *retreats hastily to comparative safety of weekend open thread*

      Do not judge me. I am still half asleep.

    56. Vikrant — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:32 am  

      PP’s blogroll is pretty diverse.

      Yeah right… Sunny even used to link to that Yusuf Smith whacko.

    57. Jay Singh — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:36 am  

      Vikrant, you’re really very rude.

      Did you get bored on Jihadwatch?

    58. Vikrant — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:41 am  

      yeah sort of… i’m planning Pinko Watch.

    59. Jay Singh — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:48 am  

      Are you still fed up that the BBC is infested with Muslim lovers and that India is so full of dhimmis?

    60. Vikrant — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:52 am  

      Well i’ve told you b4 the JW account i shared my half a dozen people. Vikrant isnt even my real name (only Sunny knows my real name).

    61. Vikrant — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:54 am  

      should read * is shared *…

      now shh…. i’m writing an article on Anti-reservation protests…

    62. Jay Singh — on 14th May, 2006 at 11:57 am  

      I see Vikrant - I believe you ;-)

    63. Vikrant — on 14th May, 2006 at 12:00 pm  

      I dont care whether you believe me or not. I’m not about to leave my telephone no. here. My name is Améy… Vikrant is my friend’s name; i only this name over blogs coz its easier to pronounce for Non-Maharashtrians.

    64. bananabrain — on 15th May, 2006 at 5:47 pm  

      Likewise, Freud’s creation of the three aspects of the mind may not have been influenced by the Holy Trinity, where’s the evidence? (incidentally, he was an Ashkenazi Jew)

      freud knew crap-all about judaism. he wasn’t at all conversant with religious texts or traditional interpretation and the vast majority of his patients were neurotic middle-class assimilated viennese jews like himself. his big idea about G!D - “it’s your dad in a big beard in the sky”; i mean, honestly. way to reduce a 3000 year old religious tradition with complexity way out of his experience (although, ironically, not jung’s) to an ignorant shibboleth. of course, “everybody knows” (according to some bloke down the pub, presumably) there’s nothing original in judaism, it was all nicked from the egyptians. gaaaah.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2007. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.