Hindu Forum’s mask drops
The BBC Asian Network aired a recent documentary titled ‘Don’t call me Asian‘, on how some people don’t want to be called Asian. It should come as no surprise that the people interviewed who hated the term ‘British Asian’ were: the Hindu Forum of Britain, Hindu Youth and Sikh Federation. On using the term ‘British Asian’ I won’t expand on when it’s right and when it’s wrong; that deserves a proper explanation in itself.
The doc was disappointing on a few fronts. It took the recent HF report at face value without questioning the methodology. It also gave too much time to these religious representatives. What about asking ordinary people on the street? What about asking those who are not obsessed about religion all the time?
Most importantly, there was little exploration on their ulterior motives. Right at the end though, the mask slips. The guy from the Hindu Forum says:
Now the Hindu community has voiced itself, and what we would welcome most is that government departments started to recognise this term ‘British Hindu’, come to grips with it, engage with the Hindu community.For example one criteria would be, when the government monitor its distributes of funding or whether it be the way it distributes benefits, all of these things should have the term British Hindu attached to it because it gives greater clarification of what kind of condition the British Hindu community is in.
Unfortunately Asian Network shied away from exploring this key element further. It’s not like the Sikh Federation behaves any differently.
They are all the same. If this blog can do anything to make people realise their game, people with influence in the government, then it is performing a service.
Yup, they’re after the money, no surprise. I met Ramesh (head of the HF) a couple of years back. While he was pleasant enough in person it was plainly obvious he is ambitious and wants influence and status off the back of his organisation…
WHat i want to know, after reading some of the comments on BBC asia website, is how Hindu kids, or Sikh kids will distinguish themselves from Muslim kids on the streets? By labelling themselves differently, the person on the street can tell the difference? Whilst the organisations may be after cash, how does this relate to the average person on the street? What’s the benefit to non-muslim asians on a practical level?
They are all very charming in person. But to society as a whole, they are rotten.
But I think one good thing that Ruth Kelly is doing now is taking a much more sceptical approach to these outfits, and I hope this extends to the HF and SF as much as it does to the Muslim orgs — no more sectarianism and demands for money and separate agendas and communalist front organisations wishing to bully their way into power and influence.
Sahil
I dont have a problem with Hindus or Sikhs wanting to distinguish themselves from Muslims on a personal level. This is partly in reaction to the Asian Muslim rejection of an Asian identity in the first place, which is a definite phenomenon.
I do have a problem with communalist organisations going down the same road as Muslim Councils of Parliamentary Islamic Governments of Britain did —- because it has been disastrous for Muslims and I dont want any more disasters.
British Indian should suffice! Asian is too large a representation of many different peoples and cultures and beliefs. So for a person of Indian origin, British Indian is the way to go. I use it myself and so do many people I know, Sikh, Hindu or Muslim. However, some Muslims will prefer to allign themselves with their religion more just like some of these reported Hindus want to.
Why would you not want to distinguish yourself ? Theres nothing wrong with that ? If I’m asked why I’m not fasting i tell my colleagues its becasue I’m not Muslim but Hindu.
Its true that the term British-Asian has become a byword for British-Muslim.
Jagdeep:
“I dont have a problem with Hindus or Sikhs wanting to distinguish themselves from Muslims on a personal level. This is partly in reaction to the Asian Muslim rejection of an Asian identity in the first place, which is a definite phenomenon.”
I agree, that’s fine in itself, but some of the comments on that site, argued that they don’t want to be labelled together with muslims, as people associate muslims with violence, whilst hindus and sikhs are viewed as peaceful. But how does labelling yourself differently affect how people will treat you on the street level, I mean is a hindu any less ‘brown’ than a muslim kid. If there is racist nonsense or type-casting, how will labelling on a census, or job application, change how people view you for example on the tube?
BTW Ditto about the organisations. It’s the micro level I’m little more worried about.
It’s a manifestation of many things Sahil, many reasons — wanting to distinguish yourself is an understandable thing, especially when there is continuous misidentification throughout society.
=>”Its true that the term British-Asian has become a byword for British-Muslim.”
I keep saying this too.
It doesn’t help when people like the representative of one of the main Muslim organisations here complained a few days ago about the fact that the impeding Olympics will be held at the same time as Ramadan, which (quote) “risks alienating the Asian communities”.
Obviously, it’s not going to “alienate” the Asian Sikh and Hindu communities in Britain, is it ?
“Muslim organisations here complained a few days ago about the fact that the impeding Olympics will be held at the same time as Ramadan, which (quote) “risks alienating the Asian communities””
How would it even risk Muslim Alienation?? These guys are just full of shit!
Just out of interest, in the last UK census there were:
1139065 Asian Muslims
533397 Asian Hindus
316763 Asian Sikhs
The overall number of Asians in the UK, including all other religons, was 2273737. So the majority of British Asians are Muslims but only just (slightly more than 50%).
would prefer british indian, british pakistani, etc myself… or even british kashmiri, british punjabi… afterball, i would be ahppy being lumped into a vaguely latin group (let alone “other white”, where I usually end up)
CORRECTION: afterall, i would be unhappy being lumped into a vaguely latin group (let alone “other white”, where I usually end up)
I agree Sahil — stories like that are pure bullshit cooked up by a mixture of idiot identity politicians and opportunistic wanker tabloid shit-stirrers.
Raz wrote :Just out of interest, in the last UK census there were:
1139065 Asian Muslims
533397 Asian Hindus
316763 Asian Sikhs
The overall number of Asians in the UK, including all other religons, was 2273737. So the majority of British Asians are Muslims but only just (slightly more than 50%).
Sorry Raz, But I think you’ll find that total muslim popluation includes all muslims, not just ‘asians’. So, unless Somalians,Arabs, Persians, Albanians, Kosovans, Turks and Kurds have also now become ‘Asian’ you’re figures are more than just a little bit wrong. But, I bet the reason you came up with your theory of most British Asians being muslim, and the reason in fact for this whole debate, is the ‘north-south’ divide we have in this country. You’re probably from ‘up north’ where the average ‘asian’ person in the street is muslim. I on the other hand, along with the majority of Englands sikhs and hindus, live in the south where the average ‘asian’ is either sikh or hindu. So,if I used your logic of judging from my point of view outside my ’southern’ front window, 95% of British asians are Sikh.
I come from a community which officialy has Britains highest home ownersip rate. Lowest crime rate. Lowest prison polulation rate. Highest academic achievement rate and highest level of affluence. So what on earth would I have in common with ‘muslim asians’?
Sunny –
I think the debate is rapidly getting to the point where your proper explanation would be useful.
We’d all be a little better off if we realised that we all have multiple identities, and that the identity that is most precious to us at a given point in time is that identity which we think to be most threatened.
And no, right now I don’t have an urge to stress any identity associated with the melanin content of my skin.
=>”How would it even risk Muslim Alienation?? These guys are just full of shit!”
There were articles about it in several of the main national newspapers last week, along with the television news channels too. I think it has something to do with the fact that Muslims in general will be fasting at the time, which is obviously going to impact Muslim athletes but (more relevant) is apparently also going to affect the ability of British Muslims to enjoy the games. Maybe he was referring to Muslim spectators who’d want to watch the games “live” at the sports stadium. I’m not quite sure how it would affect Muslims watching the games on TV at home, unless it’s because they’d be too busy with friends/relatives breaking their fasts at the time or something.
*shrug* I don’t know.
Isn’t the Olympic timetable set by the IOC?
Isn’t the IOC made up of memember states through out the world. They are the ones to complain to if it’s a problem.
Chris - Yes agreed - I prefer British Taxpayer at the moment!
Justforfun
No - revise that - English Taxpayer
Justforfun
justforfun –
Unfortunately, I don’t think my identity as a Taxpayer is going to be threatened any time soon
One can always dream of a future in the Caymans, of course.
british asian appears to be an overarching descrption which can include some subsets - of which british muslim happens to be one and british hindu can be another/sikh/atheist/jain who knows what can be others. of course the british muslim thing is a bit funny since there are muslims who aren’t south asian or asian at all. if these guys want more recognition for the term british hindu thats fair enought isnt it. in any case all they have to do is keep saying it enough times and then it will catch on..
must be a recent thing. i remember the HF types i met at uni most definitely referred to themselves as British Asian/. of course the attention on british muslims is due to the perception of trouble making! perhaps the british hindus might want to take a leaf out of that book if they want similar media attention..
(
heh heh) ill leave it to kismet to come up with some suitable headlines..
ah chris stiles something you’ve said that is very sensible and worth keeping hold of:
“We’d all be a little better off if we realised that we all have multiple identities, and that the identity that is most precious to us at a given point in time is that identity which we think to be most threatened.”
aye!
Wasn’t that long ago (oh lets see now, 1985?) when Whitey referred to all of us as “Black”.
Well Hindu itself is an overarching description. Frankly British Indian would suffice.
Perhaps everyone should carry round little cards with full details of nationality, religion, ethnic group, race, caste, class, profession, sexuality, and any other aspects of their identity they feel relevant?
Then if someone wants to beat someone up for being in the wrong group, they can check their identity card first to make sure they are not beating them up for the wrong reason.
Asians don’t need no card. They can place, size-up, and figure out what another Asian ate for their last meal within seconds of meeting each other. I think I saw this particular “skill” parodied in Goodness Gracious Me once.
If such a card needed to be carried, it would be for the benefit of those outside the diaspora. Oh but wait, such a card is already on the books.
yeah let’s do what the nazis did why dont we - here’s a badge for you.. a nice little identifier.
*identity relevant to one on a card*
oh so mine would have my name on it and nothing else. too often all this ‘identity’ business is really about groups and nothing else. why should anyone assume that a group identity is important to everyone. pshaw.
As vice president of the National Secular Society, I was invited onto the BBC Asian Network to discuss the closing of the exhibition of paintings by MF Hussein in London after complaints from “Hindus”. A man from the Hindu Council was up afgainst me. He kept saying he was speaking for the !Hindu Community!. I asked him on what authority he imagined that every Hindu in Britain agreed with his reactionary religious agenda. He got mighty angry, but all the Hindus who phoned in to the programme disagreed with hi. WEvery one of them! Such are the manipulations and power-seeking of so-called “faith leaders”. It’s time to show them the door.
As vice president of the National Secular Society, I was invited onto the BBC Asian Network to discuss the closing of the exhibition of paintings by MF Hussein in London after complaints from “Hindus”. A man from the Hindu Council was up afgainst me. He kept saying he was speaking for the !Hindu Community!. I asked him on what authority he imagined that every Hindu in Britain agreed with his reactionary religious agenda. He got mighty angry, but all the Hindus who phoned in to the programme disagreed with hi. WEvery one of them! Such are the manipulations and power-seeking of so-called “faith leaders”. It’s time to show them the door.
come from a community which officialy has Britains highest home ownersip rate. Lowest crime rate. Lowest prison polulation rate. Highest academic achievement rate and highest level of affluence. So what on earth would I have in common with ‘muslim asians’?
your’re chinese?
Whether or not the word british asain or not is acceptable, the word cannot by judicial decisions be applied to sikhs. Maybe you have read the House of Lords decision in Mandela where sikhs were identified as a sepearte ethnic community. therefore they should be recognised seperately. There is no higher precedence then the house of lords.
On using the term ‘British Asian’ I won’t expand on when it’s right and when it’s wrong; that deserves a proper explanation in itself.
Sunny there is a lot of money to be in Equality and diversity training. I would not begrudge you getting your share.
I do object to this obsession about language which has developed on this thread. Calm down the lot of you.
Well said Terry Anderson ! The one thing all these “faith leaders” seem to have in common are bigotted views.
It’s a wonder there isn’t a mass conversion to atheism in protest.
I do object to this obsession about language which has developed on this thread. Calm down the lot of you.
how people are defined is relevant in how groups relate to the government, especially when that gov. disburses services and monies to groups as opposed to individuals. one reason that browns in the USA pushe to be classified as asian american (we were once in our own category, then lumped with ‘whites’ like middle eastern people) is for preferential treatment in bidding for government contracts. in san francisco some chinese american business persons actually attempted to declassify brownz as asian american so that they could get a bigger piece of the contract pie. similarly, some southeast asian refugees in california want to be classified separately from other asian american groups (chinese, japanese, korean and brown) for purposes of university admissions because they are relatively deprived vis-a-vis other asian groups but they get the same ‘asian penalty’ of higher standards for admission to selective universities.
people have killed over shibboleths and nuances over language, so i think sunny’s ‘obsession’ is warranted
people have killed over shibboleths and nuances over language, so i think sunny’s ‘obsession’ is warranted.
No Razib if you do not take offence a word loses its power.
Jabir,
Are you fucking thick or something? All T=the numbers I quoted (from the 2001 census) are purely ASIAN ONLY. Can you not fucking read? So much for ‘your high academic achievment’ LOL. Retard.
“No Razib if you do not take offence a word loses its power. ”
and if religious people did not kill in the name of god evil would not be done in his name.
to be clear, as an american i’m not invested in whether brownz are ‘asian’ or not on your side of the pond, and i am generally one who favors intermarriage and cultural extinction of brown groups in the west anyhow (looking at your intermarriage numbers, even for ’successful’ groups you are a lot less prone to mixing in cream than on this side of the pond). my only point is that the reality is that labels are relevant and effect our lives, so i don’t see discussion of them worthless. we are a species with a fixation on names.
Razib:come from a community which officialy has Britains highest home ownersip rate. Lowest crime rate. Lowest prison polulation rate. Highest academic achievement rate and highest level of affluence. So what on earth would I have in common with ‘muslim asians’?
your’re chinese?
Well. Lets be honest. I certainly can’t belong to the Pakistani community I’m supposed to lumped with (Asian). Perhaps your in-house keep it in the family marriage custom is to blame, but you’re losing sight of the fact that on the one hand you’ve got hindus and sikhs living nowhere near the dark dull dumps up north and doing extremely well for themselves and being productive members of British society…and on the other hand theres your lot ; incest practising strains on the British economy.
Why oh why would sikhs and hindus want to be put into the same groupings as thge likes of you?
Whether or not the word british asain or not is acceptable, the word cannot by judicial decisions be applied to sikhs.
Won’t somebody think of the skinheads?
It’s getting so you need a degree in discriminatology to be a racist thug these days. They are not the brightest of people, how are they supposed to know who to hate?
Maybe it could be offered as an adult ed class?
“and if religious people did not kill in the name of god evil would not be done in his name.”
True enough but i am referring to the whole idea of PC identity politics which is quite harmful to human relations.Diversity training which tells you which terms to use or not use is harmful to human relations. It is also patronising as it presumes that we can not handle any level of offence.
I think we can say one thing without doubt:
No Asian : Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or otherwise, wants to be associated with Jabir
Why oh why would sikhs and hindus want to be put into the same groupings as thge likes of you?
uh, as in “you” are you talking about me? i’m not a muslim, and don’t identify as such. but i’ll add that to my handle since it might be necessary.
True enough but i am referring to the whole idea of PC identity politics which is quite harmful to human relations.Diversity training which tells you which terms to use or not use is harmful to human relations. It is also patronising as it presumes that we can not handle any level of offence.
i reject PC identity politics myself. but, i think it is important to engage lest we cede ground and lose the war by default.
‘He kept saying he was speaking for the !Hindu Community!.’
Terry
Id say he was as good as representing the majority Hindus when he said this. Especially with regards to the hedious MF painting. Hindus are not new to Nude painting. However the painting by MF was an intentional abuse which the majority of Hindus do dislike. Unfortunetly the Hindu community are not vocal at all. Majority of them just take the bitter pill and leave it to (as they say ‘Raam Bharose’) in the hand of God Himslef. However that does not mean there was no feeling of anger and hate.
‘but all the Hindus who phoned in to the programme disagreed with him’
These were probably Hindus who are on this forum!!
I cant beleive that no Hindus rang into say they disagreed.
“Right at the end though, the mask slips.”
I think this is very cheap report by you Sunny again on Hindus.
You’re desperatley clawing to find some fault on Hindus and trying to make it into a huge issue.
‘Oh look Ive found something on the Hindus hahahaha’
Majority of them just take the bitter pill and leave it to (as they say ‘Raam Bharose’) in the hand of God Himslef.
of course, and this is why secularists tend to respect hindus as civilized people as opposed to the primitive performance of many muslims. of course, some hindus perceive that their leaders and community is supine and not assertive enough vis-a-vis the muslim community, but if the goth sacks rome shall one rape and pillage in emulation of his masculine grandeur? speaking as an atheist the solution is to ramp up blasphemy against islam to match that against christianity or hinduism. all religions are equal in the eyes of their non-existent gods
Sid,
C’mon mate that’s not exactly true is it. I mean it’s not that long ago that some Asians, forpolitical reasons, insisted on being called black.
I don’t beleive for a second this issue has anything to do with identity, being associated with muslims or any other bollocks, it’s about money and money alone.
For years a number of (fairly effective and representitive) muslim ‘grass-roots’ organisations have been campaigning to have funds allocated seperately for Muslims because funding has more often been won by more organised Hindu organisations leading to a bias in the apportioning of funds, I base this on having seen the effects of this first hand.
Now Muslims are a ‘hot issue’ and the government needs to be seen to be engaging with the muslim community they’re chucking money at them and claiming kudos for there sensitivity in working with the grass-roots, meanwhile those hindu organisations faced with increased competition for resources are pissed off because they for once have the short end of the stick.
Razib, I wasn’t going to add anything to this thread. But you ‘having’ to change your handle does you no favours. I am sure you are intelligent enough to tackle the issue without it.
Jai, I assumed when you introduced him, that we would get at least reasonable debate from Razib. He’s proving to be pretty fundamentalist if you ask me.
I like Razib’s fundamentalism.
ZinZin, thinking about it maybe I can see why you would.
Jai, I assumed when you introduced him, that we would get at least reasonable debate from Razib. He’s proving to be pretty fundamentalist if you ask me.
your contention would be more credible if you didn’t concern yourself with my handle. i don’t want to be confused for muslims, i find it insulting, it’s as simple as that.
Sigh-
More Hindu-Sikh-Muslim squabbling….
While you guys continue to beat a dead horse, something that ALL of you UK Asians should be concerned about:
http://www.passtheroti.com/?p=274
Keep an eye on all “Asian looking” university students.
The HF aren’t going to get anyones attention unless they start killing people. Are they not paying attention to today’s politics?
Problem with that link:
‘have been urged ‘
vs.
‘are to be asked’
Some spook or copper failed to use the correct wording in a draft contribution to a document. Big deal. That got leaked by someone with an agenda, and thrown as another log onto the media-muslim-frenzy bonfire.
Can you imagine anything with that wording actually being sent out to UK academics, about 20% of whom have at one stage or other planned the violent overthrow of HMG? About as likely as a newsreader forgetting to put on any clothes before going on air.
Don’t play their game, this is no more a story than anything else containing the ‘m’-word that’s been in the papers the last 3 weeks.
i don’t want to be confused for muslims, i find it insulting, it’s as simple as that.
This is illogical really. Calling someone Briton could imply that they are Hindu, Sikh, Muslim or Christian. Or you may decide to call yourself Hindu and a Hare Krishna objects to being associated with an Arya Samaj follower.
The point about labels is not what they are called but in what context they are used.
As Terry Sanderson says above he was faced with a very intolerant member of the Hindu community who supported the shutting down of the exhibition. Sunray is also of that ilk. But there are other Hindus who would not. So what kind of a Hindu would one be exactly?
The point of this article seems to be understood most well by fabius.
This is very little to do with identity and much more to do with money. People are welcome to call themselves what they want. When they start lobbying govt to re-position politics so money comes to them, then it’s a different issue.
It’s the same with Sikh groups demanding to be recognised as a separate ethnic group. It is completely absurd. They are protected under race-hate legislation along with Jews but I think the whole premise is absurd. Sikhs and Jews are not a separate race or ethnic group. All this is simply identity politics.
Desi - I’m sorry but I agree with soru. That story is all hype and very little substance. In practice it means very little apart from giving lecturers or student unions more of an incentive to report dodgy activities by Hizb ut Tahrir or MPAC. Frankly it’s about time. I got sick of the rubbish Al-Muj and others used to plaster around my uni.
El Cid, #49.
Yes absolutely agree. But that was because all the grants were in projects that favoured the “Black” tag, remember? So to be ethnic was to be Black. The de-representation of this racial nomenclature is what we’re seeing being played out, in this case by the HF. But the grants-machinery remains principially the same.
uh, sunny what did the quote from my comment have to do with the rest of your post?
Keep an eye on all “Asian looking” university students.
Desi have you ever heard of the hounding Hindu students face a the hands of Islamists?
I prefer British Indian rather than British Asian. Asian is a vague term.
“That story is all hype and very little substance”
So let me get this straight:
Everybody here loves to shoot the shit endlessly about religion, resulting in conversations going everywhere and nowhere. “All hype and very little substance.” The document that I blogged about was to bring to attention something (mostly for our North American readers). But no, it’s “hype,” right? It certainly wouldn’t hurt to look into it.
“Don’t play their game, this is no more a story than anything else containing the ‘m’-word that’s been in the papers the last 3 weeks.”
This is classic irony. How about a cursory glance at all of the PP blogs that contain the ‘m” word?
I now have a bittersweet relationship with PP.
I prefer British Indian rather than British Asian.
There really is no hope for me. It is a minefield all these identity labels.
Refresh I take a dim view of Hindu fundamentalism as well as well as other fundamentalisms. Is the HF in favour of the caste system?
Sunny why exactly is wanting to shut down an exhibition showing Hindu Gods in offensive ways ‘intolerant’ ? I applaud whoever caused the exhibition to be closed down.
Is seems that Hindus tolerance is taken for granted and when any Hindu stands up and disagrees then he/she is seen as intolerant. Its clear a higher standard of tolerance is expected from Hindus whereas people will go out of their way to appease any slight Muslim fears !
All communities should have the same standard of tolerance expected from them otherwise its pointless.
What’s wrong with depicting any fictional being(s) in an offensive manner?
Sunny,
=>”This is illogical really.”
No, Razib just doesn’t want anyone to mistake him for a practicing Muslim due to his name. Jasbir’s post #41 is a prime example of “mistaken identity” in this regard. That’s all he meant, although obviously he doesn’t have a high opinion of Islam so there are also going to be some personal negative connotations from his perspective regarding being misidentified as a practicing Muslim.
(By the way — did you receive the email I sent you last Saturday ? Apologies if I’m pre-empting your response and you just haven’t got around to it yet — I just wanted to check you received the mail and the attached file intact).
Refresh,
=>”Jai, I assumed when you introduced him, that we would get at least reasonable debate from Razib. He’s proving to be pretty fundamentalist if you ask me.”
Razib will probably disagree with me about the exact definition of this term (and has done so previously on PP), but in my view he’s what would be regarded as an “apostate Muslim”. Meaning, he was born into an observant Muslim family, he went along with the various rituals and paraphernalia when he was younger, but never genuinely believed in the faith himself, and has now disassociated himself completely from the religion. (I believe he explained all this himself recently on PP too).
He has his own various reasons for doing so, but in this sense he’s no different to the other commenters on PP (and in the real world) who have become disillusioned with their hereditary religions. I can understand why some practising Muslims such as yourself may find some of his views offensive, but since Razib is originally from a Muslim background himself, I regard all that as an “internal matter”, in the same way that (for example) commenters here originally from a Hindu or Christian background may have become atheistic/agnostic in their beliefs and possibly even bitter about some aspects of their previous religious affiliation.
Razib is “fundamentalist” in the sense of being an avowed atheist (at this point in his life, anyway — who knows what will happen in the future ?), and his views on religion in general are clear. However, my own religious beliefs are also clear (even though in some ways I’m not the most strictly-observant Sikh around, and I’m not going to be a hypocrite by trying to deny that), as has been stated numerous times on PP and also Sepia Mutiny — yet Razib and I get along extremely well and very amicably agree to disagree in this subject.
As long as someone isn’t being deliberately malicious, you don’t have to agree on absolutely everything in order to get on well with them and have an extremely high opinion of the other person.
However, I can see why Razib’s outspoken views on orthodox Islam in particular would touch a nerve with you and possibly other practicing Muslims too, so I will let you guys fight it out amongst yourselves regarding that particular issue.
In that case, here is a practising Muslim stepping up to the bat (or something).
Razib comes across as a well-written and intelligent individual. Unfortunately, I think he naturally gravitates to a position which is anti-Islamic because of his own family heritage.
Razib believes that Islam is ‘inferior’ and does not wnt to be associated with Muslims. Well, the feeling is mutual I can assure you.
He also states that “if religious people did not kill in the name of god evil would not be done in his name”.
This is a simplistic way of trying to blame something that is an ugly aspect of human nature, on religion. Now, foregoing the blindingly obvious fact that Islam forbids the murder of innocents (and so anyone who goes against this is de facto NOT a muslim, like razib), I think it is worth poiting out that “if atheist people did not kill in the name of oil and profit, then evil would not be done. period.”
“Razib is “fundamentalist” in the sense of being an avowed atheist (at this point in his life, anyway — who knows what will happen in the future ?), and his views on religion in general are clear.”
That was my point.
I couldn’t see how he could have been confused as anything else. Why change his ‘handle’?
To urge everyone to blaspheme (I am no longer sure what that means anymore) to the same level as some might against Hindus and Christians is just plain silly. Doesn’t come across as someone who would be looking for a progressive path to anything.
Being deliberately insulting to someone’s belief is just playground stuff. I personally, and don’t know of anyone else, who has ‘blasphemed’ either of the religions. Argue about specifics perhaps, never insulted.
I believe that has been the true heritage of South Asians - tolerance and acceptance of individual’s faiths.
By the way I hadn’t recognised Razib as a muslim name in any case. Perhaps I don’t get out enough.
In the spirit of being open (and non-hypocritical) I too am not that observant.
Desi, I agree with you on the proposed intstructions to Higher Education establishments. Will have a read of your blog.
I think people are in denial.
On the question of funding being the issue - I don’t think its that simple - its more to do with influence.
Refresh,
=>”I couldn’t see how he could have been confused as anything else.”
Jasbir’s post #41 is a perfect example. Bear in mind also that Razib has been a long-term commenter on Sepia Mutiny, and apparently he was previously misidentified as a Muslim (with posts and accusations hurled in his direction accordingly) so frequently that he deliberately had to change his handle permanently to “Razib_the_Atheist” in order to pre-empt any confusion.
It would also be difficult for someone who is not a regular on PP to identify either me or you by our religions, for example, if they were going to base their assumptions purely on usernames (I’d probably be mistaken for a Hindu). Same principle for Razib.
Hell, until very recently, I’d thought Amir was an Asian Muslim (albeit a very “moderate” or even lapsed one) until he clarified his ethnicity and religious affiliation. I’m not kidding.
I get the impression that Sunny & many of the regular members of the PP team/posters regard the whole notion of faith/ based community groups as a Bad Thing.
While I share the disgust of many here on the blatant attempt to grab money etc, ethnic groups & religious communites have a legimate role.
government and politics is all about organising and mobolising people whether it’s around political ideology, class, special interests etc. People as individuals don’t exert power only as collectives.
If your not organised you don’t get a voice or even a mention on the agenda. A classic example of this were Sikhs in France, no one was to speak on their behalf to officaldom, so they actually invisible as far as the government was concerned.
Uncleji that is a good point regarding France.
However, we should not allow these faith groups to promote separatism, communalism, nor expect special priveliges and special demands. We need to keep a balance between legitimate concerns - so lobbying groups are fine, but expecting money from the government is wrong. I’ll tell you why. Certain religious ‘forums’ are deeply conservative running to hardline fundamentalist, and their agenda is not just one of advocacy on certain issues, it is to use their position of power to define who can belong to a certain group, and persecute and bully those who ’step out of line’. They dont have a clue about democracy or the idea of secularism. So there should be no repeat of the mistake made towards Muslim groups with any other.
We don’t want Indian communalism here in England. No funding of religious bodies. No more separatism. Ruth Kelly is on the right lines - in fact I want her to harden her stance and lay the law down to some of these scoundrels who are begging for money off the state.
Just a few quick points before my lunchbreak ends…
If as a Asian, a Muslim, a Sikh, a Hindu etc you feel that the groups that claim to speak for you do not then involve yourself to change them or failing that set up a group that speaks for moderate _ _ _ _ insert here.
In fact why don’t we set up a community group for those who want to be called Asian………
back to work
incidently “Who you calling Asian” was first transmitted on Radio 4
Sunny why exactly is wanting to shut down an exhibition showing Hindu Gods in offensive ways ‘intolerant’ ? I applaud whoever caused the exhibition to be closed down.
Neil - firstly that exhibition wasn’t offensive. If you’d seen the paintings, they did not depict Indian goddesses having sex. I don’t know who the hell had that impression.
Secondly, you and Sunray are welcome to be offended and protest. But shutting down an exhibition by force goes against the law and goes against the free speech values of this country. That is where I stand.
Uncleji - same name but a new doc.
jagdeep:
“Certain religious ‘forums’ are deeply conservative running to hardline fundamentalist, and their agenda is not just one of advocacy on certain issues, it is to use their position of power to define who can belong to a certain group, and persecute and bully those who ’step out of line’.”
yeah i hear you
did amir declare his ethnicity? i must have missed that one…
Sonia,
Yes, I believe Amir described himself as Caucasian.
Sunny stand corrected my boy
Sonia - In the case of the Sikh case “the deeply conservative” (Network of the Sikh Organisations) are competion and opposition with the “hardline fundamentalist” Sikh Federation.
Its the Uncleji’s versus the scary singhs.
And Despite the impression that is has been given the Uncleji who get the government funding, the positions on committees and ear of politicians etc etc
The Sikh Federation is just one loud bunch of wannbees.
The government should change it’s policy on who gets what money.
Instead of giving money to the conservative types to keep the radicals quiet, give it to the most extreme comitted radicals that can be found. And no wimpy sharing equally, one group takes the whole pot, whoever can prove themselves most hard-core.
To fairly decide which group this is, they can organise some kind of gladatorial combat. Jihadis vs. sikh warriors vs skinheads, in the millenium dome, free choice of weapons.
Stick it on pay per view, and the whole exercise will pay for itself.
And then maybe normal people can get on with their lives.
Instead of giving money to the conservative types to keep the radicals quiet, give it to the most extreme comitted radicals that can be found. And no wimpy sharing equally, one group takes the whole pot, whoever can prove themselves most hard-core.
You know, I like your idea of a tag team wrestling match in the millenium dome. But I think what you and Uncleji have said can be combined into what I think the way should be.
There is NO NEED for government to give funding to ANY religious grouping. HOWEVER….if such things need to be done a number of rules must be observed. The government should lay down a number of guidelines, for which any group must meet in order to even be considered for government sponsorship:
(a) Commitment to female emancipation, including taking a strong stance on certain gender issues AND having a significant female membership in the core commitee of the organisation.
(b) A Commitment to freedom of speech AND a total disavowal of communalist rhetoric
(c) The organisation should not make ANY claim to speak on behalf or for an entire community.
(d) Is utterly non-sectarian and does not engage in campaigns of persecution or criticism of those members of the community from which they arise that do not conform to their ideas on lifestyle or mainstream theology/practise.
(e) Each group is aware that they are in their position on a provisional basis to engage in advocacy and positive engagment
(f) Each group’s aim MUST BE to have one mission in mind - to aid the INTEGRATION of their communities into BRITISH SOCIETY ie: their existence and status is given on the sole basis that they actively campaign for harmonisation between communities with mainstream life. The welfare of British society must be as big a motivation for their activism as the welfare of the community from which they come.
—-
All of these issues should be observed and monitored and verified — no single ‘community’ should be represented by one body — each group understands that this relationship between government is under constant review and contingent.
Oh yeah, I also believe that the government should sponsor a high profile Asian feminist group like the Southall Black Sisters as much as they sponsor purely religious based Asian advocacy outfits.
Uncleji — yes you are right regarding the deeply conservative ‘good guys’ versus the hardcore bad guys but I think Ruth Kelly (my current hero!) has the number of the Sikh Federation and knows their tricks and games and rhetoric.
*claps for jagdeep*
i agree with your criteria. in fact, it sounds to me like the only groups who will get funding after this are the church of england, the catholics and the board of deputies!
i have got two books on sikhism out of the library and am working my way through them, because i’ve decided i’m far too ignorant about what appears to be a generally fab religion. one is called “the sikhs” by khushwant singh (1952) and the other, “sikhs in britain” by gurharpal singh and darshan singh tatla (2006). previously my reading was restricted to “flashman and the mountain of light”, all about how flashy helped the east india company screw over the punjab and nick the koh-i-noor, to my total lack of surprise.
anyway, i’m now knee-deep in akalis, gurmukhi, the singh sabha. the ghadr rebellion and the battle of burrard inlet!
b’shalom
bananabrain
Bananabinder,
There’s a book called “The Sikhs” by Patwant Singh which is also recommended. Haven’t read it properly myself but have flicked through it; apparently it’s quite good.
In the meantime, if you really want to learn about Sikhism and the faith’s history then I recommend you also check out Sikhnet and Sikhs.org. Both are packed with information and will serve as a good “primer”.
Bananabrain — ‘Sikhs in Britain’ is an excellent book which I have just finished reading and actually reccomended here a few weeks ago - and I would just re-emphasise my recommendation to read and buy that book to everyone.
But I dont think only those orgs you mentioned would qualify — there are plenty of Sikh and Hindu and Muslim groups who would, but until now havent, because they were either off the radar or being ignored by ‘he who shouts loudest’….although now the wonderful Ruth Kelly is doing her thing this is hopefully changing.
“As Terry Sanderson says above he was faced with a very intolerant member of the Hindu community who supported the shutting down of the exhibition. Sunray is also of that ilk. But there are other Hindus who would not. So what kind of a Hindu would one be exactly?”
Terry doesn’t know what he was facing and neither do you. Its intolerant people like you that are trying to make headlines for the love of money and fame.
Hindus know very well what intolerance means and that’s why you rarely have a Hindu raised voice in the media or on the street. Even when provoked by idiots calling their temples pornographic or bras and panties printed with pics of Hindus Gods or toilet seat with pics of Hindu Gods.
When one attacks and abuses your very Mother and Father, it would be cowardice on the part of any Hindu not to protest or feel hurt.
If you’re so cool about MF Hussain why don’t have a portrait of your Mother and Father painted in the nude in some erotic pose and have it hung in some gallery. Better still why don’t you post it on here.
Free speech does not give anyone the right to abuse ones Mother and Father.
MF wanted nothing more then to make a quick buck at the expense of abusing the Hindu Mother and Father.
This very thread accuses the Hindus of wanting money, yet you turn a blind eye when it comes to MFH wanting to make a quick buck and international fame. Instead you raise a campaign to support this greedy idiot.
Well Im not surprised.
“While he was pleasant enough in person it was plainly obvious he is ambitious and wants influence and status off the back of his organisation… ” Leon
you said this about Ramesh but we could say this about anyone — this could be said about Sunny for example.
ooops Ive already said that about Sunny^^
You just don’t get it do you Sunray?
with intelligence a lot of you have lost your commonsense.
http://cuisinecuisine.blogspot.com/
Sunray, I know trying to reason with you is near impossible but I’ll try anyway. I think it may be useful for you to learn a bit more about Hinduism too… because most of your objections result from not knowing enough about the religion you profess to follow in the first place. Rather like these Hizb ut Tahrir types.
1) The painting was an abstract. It did not show any goddess having sex with an animal. Research it first.
2) My mother exists. These godesses did not exist. It is mythology my friend… they are stories that are meant to invoke love and understanding of the supreme parmatama. The all knowing and omni-present. It really annoys me when people start taking mythology literally and thinking that Ganesha actually existed on earth as a real live being. Or that Lakshmi or Saraswati were real live Gods. Gosh, what ignorance. Please learn a bit more Hindu history and philosophy man, you do injustice to your own tradition.
Idols and stories are meant to help you focus your mind and your devotion. They are meant to be a guide to a moksha. They are not for idiots to start a fight over.
Hindus know very well what intolerance means and that’s why you rarely have a Hindu raised voice in the media or on the street.
Oh really. the Gujarat riots were a figment of our imagination then.
Sunray:
“Hindus know very well what intolerance means and that’s why you rarely have a Hindu raised voice in the media or on the street. Even when provoked by idiots calling their temples pornographic or bras and panties printed with pics of Hindus Gods or toilet seat with pics of Hindu Gods.
When one attacks and abuses your very Mother and Father, it would be cowardice on the part of any Hindu not to protest or feel hurt.
If you’re so cool about MF Hussain why don’t have a portrait of your Mother and Father painted in the nude in some erotic pose and have it hung in some gallery. Better still why don’t you post it on here.
Free speech does not give anyone the right to abuse ones Mother and Father.
MF wanted nothing more then to make a quick buck at the expense of abusing the Hindu Mother and Father.”
Did you know that when MF Hussain’s portrait of Saraswati first came out, it didn’t register a ripple? Guess when it did? Years ago, when some political fundamentalists made an issue of it. In other words, MILLIONS of Hindus didn’t give a rat’s ass. Why? Perhaps because their personal faith is firm and solid. Perhaps they don’t really give a shit what an artist does.
You should learn from your co-religionists.
And btw, let’s not get into this orientalization of Hindus that they are oh so complacent and tolerant, blah blah blah. A series of incidents have taken place that testify anything but.
Most people of all faiths are pretty tolerant- Hindu or not.
“It is mythology my friend… they are stories that are meant to invoke love and understanding of the supreme parmatama.”
I totally agree one hundred per cent with what you say here Sunny-its a point I’ve tried to convey many a time on barfi. However, while they are mythlogical interpretations-those symbols still represent God, the paramatma, to most Hindus. I don’t see what people are trying to prove by diminishing that point.
The argument really ought not to be about what is offensive and what is not offensive. Its the same issue with the Muhammed cartoons-we live in societies where we have the right to criticize, study or if we so choose mock ideologies, which includes religious belief. Ultimately its a free speech issue.
As with the Muhammad cartoons, the issues behind why these drawings exist are irrelevant. It comes down to whether or not you believe in free speech.
I would fully support the exhibition’s right to exist even though I am offended by some of his work. To give you an example, there’s one in a book that my dad owns where he depicts Hanuman watch Lord Rama and Sita having sexual intercourse and having a hard time staying comitted to his celibacy. To be fair, there is nothing “obscene” about it, there are no explicit scenes. But for a person to whom Rama and Sita represent God, and God within a paternal/maternalistic sense and Hanuman as the embodiment of perfect devotion, I could see it being disturbing to them.
In the same manner, we can all understand why the Satanic verses or Muhammad cartoons would be disturbing to Muslims, or why some historians’ views of Sikh Gurus offend believers. If we can understand why these things can be offensive to oridinary religious folk why is it that you become an extremely intolerant Bajrang Dal wallah if someone is offended by MF Hussain’s interpretation of Hindu deities, or symbols of the Hindu concept of divinity?
Typo:
“Years ago, when some political fundamentalists made an issue of it.”
I meant, years LATER, when some political fundamentalists made an issue of it.
Oh really. the Gujarat riots were a figment of our imagination then.
Its about the time Sunny do learnt to differentiate between Hindus and Hindutvadis. Nobody is pinning the crimes of Khalistanis on Sikhs.
Perhaps because their personal faith is firm and solid. Perhaps they don’t really give a shit what an artist does.
Perhaps they didnt know about it. While i support MF Hussains right to Freedom of Speech, i have nothing but contempt for him given his inconsistent stand on the issue. Didint he delete a song from his movies coz’ it enraged somke Muslim fundys?
“Idols and stories are meant to help you focus your mind and your devotion. They are meant to be a guide to a moksha. They are not for idiots to start a fight over.”
They are also not for some random chaff to exploit in the name of ‘art’ ! Liek i said its double standards, everyone expects Hindus to tolerate injustice because it is perceived that they always have and will continue to do so. I’m glad that his paintings arent on show here, and Sunny and other people who so badly want to see them can dig them out online !
Happy Diwali
Asia:
http://www.maproom.psu.edu/graphics2/dcw/asia-rmap.jpg
“It really annoys me when people start taking mythology literally and thinking that Ganesha actually existed on earth as a real live being. Or that Lakshmi or Saraswati were real live Gods. Gosh, what ignorance.”
So now you think all Hindus are ignorant do you!!
No wonder then you find mocking Hinduism so easy.
You obviously have no understanding of the Hindu religion and are trying to lecture me on my religious beliefs.
If as you say you understood the Hindu religion then you would not be supporting the likes of MFH.
If I have an imaginary God who is REAL to ME (Ganesh, Sitama Saraswati, Hanuman etc) and who helps me on the path of righteousness and tolerance then what gives anyone the right to abuse my imaginary God!!
Why do you get pleasure in abusing my imaginary God? You only hurt my feelings and provoke my anger.
My imaginary God is real to ME just your mother is real to you, and anyone who attacks my Mother and Father is attacking me.
I know my God is real because centuries of witnesses have proved Him to be real!!
Obviously the Christians and Muslims don’t have an imaginary God. Its only us dumb Hindus.
It seems you have a complete disregard for the Hindu faith and their values otherwise you wouldn’t be preaching me that pathetic lecture.
How ignorant and biased you are. Shame on you.
Talk about tolerance.
Who is really intolerant here?!
And Sunny you didn’t comment on MFH making money from his scam!
Why do you support this real evil beings?
Why don’t you have the guts to say that these evil people are wrong?
Oh but that wouldn’t sell your website would it!
Well at least now I know why you make up so many antiHindu articles.
“the Gujarat riots were a figment of our imagination then”
From talking about British Hindus we move to India now.
Yet again you conveniently forget that provocation was the main root of this evil.
Just as you are provoking Hindus with your twisted version of Hinduism.
Lets also not forget that Hindus have feelings like everyone else and can feel anger and hurt.
To me Sitamata is my Mother (as she is to the millions of Hindus).
But to you she may be just an imaginary character in a book and that makes it alright for anyone to attack her?
When one shows pictures of my Mother and the Mother to millions of Hindus as naked and in sexual positions then it offends us all.
I don’t think your mind can grasp this very simple point.
I said this before and say it again ‘intelligence has made you all loose your commonsense’.
Italian
“In other words, MILLIONS of Hindus didn’t give a rat’s ass. Why? Perhaps because their personal faith is firm and solid.”
Look its very simple ‘what you don’t know about cant hurt you’.
So yes if none of the Hindus knew about this abuse then its not going to upset anyone. Once they did find out, the majority were not happy. Do you really expect them to be happy – oh look they are abusing my Mother and Father, I will just ignore it?
Infact even after knowing the abuse many Hindus still ignored it as we saw from the number of protestors who turned up at the MFH protest. Why? Because one of the main teachings of Hinduism is Tolerance. It may be a word known to other religions but putting into practice is the proof of how solid and firm one has in their faith.
However lets get real.
This is the new era we are living in and provocation like these are not going to be tolerated by some Hindus.
The anger by the majority is contained behind closed doors at the minute, but the sad fact is that this anger will not be contained behind doors for very long.
Organisations like Pickled who support evil being like MFH are not helping to contain but are provoking anger into the open.
We blame the British for divide and rule.
Looks to me like someone here is single handily doing the same.
Provoke and Divide.
Sunray you are a tedious prat, do fuck off now. Go wank over some MFH paintings since you are so excited by them.
(Mirax why don’t you w*nk over your own f**k**g mother, you stu**d f*****g ev*l rot*en b*s***d.)
There you go. I couldnt get my self to even type these words.
I hope that was not too tedious.
Didn’t mean any of that by the way.
Obviously words like these are important in making a point on pickled.
‘Provoke and Divide’.
I actually listened to an interview by Ramesh Kallidai on BBC Leicester in July when he clearly said, “Our report established that 80% of the respondents did not want to be called Asian. However, they were split down the middle on whether they want to be called Indian or Hindu. There was complete agreement on not wanting to be called Asian but disagreement on whether they wished to be called Indian or Hindu.”
I looked at the report on the HFB website and it said the same thing.
Therefore, I think some of you guys are mistaken and misinformed when you try to make the HFB say (in your words) that they claim all Hindus want to be called Hindus and not Asian. You seem to be putting words in their mouth. Also Sunny seems to have some bee in his bonnet about religious organisations, and he questions there views as being non-representative, and then claims that his own views are more representative than theirs!! Silly and shortsighted!
I am an Indian Muslim myself, and I feel quite happy being called Indian - as I am very different in behaviour, outlook, and psyche from a Pakistani or Bangladeshi Muslim.
Iqbal
>Its about the time Sunny do learnt to differentiate >between Hindus and Hindutvadis. Nobody is pinning >the crimes of Khalistanis on Sikhs
I met Gurinder Chaddha who directed Bebnd it Like Beckham. When someone introduced me as a volunteer in a Hindu organisation in Birmingham, her first question to me was, “Oh, you are not from the RSS or one of those Hindu extremist groups, are you?”
I almost puked on her at her condescending attitude towards Hindus, and asked her, “O, you are a Sikh, rite?”
She nodded, and I asked, “O, you are not from one of those Khalistani terrorist groups are you?”
She went blue and just wandered out of my site without a word.
Dharmeshji, excellent reply. It is time we start to speak that way!