Significantly, the Center for the Study of Organized Hate (CSOH) documented and analysed 128 X posts targeted at Indians broadly within the Western context. According to the key findings in this study, these posts (in their dataset) received a total of 138.54M views on X as of January 3, 2025. 36 posts received over a million views, 12 of which claimed Indians to be a demographic threat to white America. The analysis further shows that these posts, that originated from 85 accounts, three-fourths of which were (64 accounts) displaying blue verification badges.

As pertinently, the posts, the report states, violated X’s own policies on Hateful Conduct. Violations included Incitement through ‘inciting fear or spreading fearful stereotypes about a protected category,’ slurs and tropes, and dehumanization. As of a week ago, January 3, 2025, 125 posts remained active, eight posts have been marked as sensitive, and one post remains active with limited visibility due to potential violations of X’s rules against Hateful Conduct.  Only 1 of 85 accounts in our database has been suspended by X.

What is the anti-Indian hate directed at?

The analysis in CSOH Report also shows that these attacks were not exclusively aimed at Hindus of Indian or American origin but extended to all those perceived as being of Indian descent, including Sikh community members.

Finally, the CSOH has put out a set of “Recommendations” that may be accessed here: These recommendations, crucial to understanding how hate expressions can be curtailed include: first, the recognition of anti-South Asian slurs, the need for expanded definitions, the requirement of an Establishment Advisory Council, an external stakeholder engagement framework the use of community notes proactively, counter-speech, transparency among many others.

X, formerly Twitter has been full of a barrage of anti-hate campaign that can be traced back to far-right Trump supporter Laura Loomer targeted Indian-Americans on X, following the appointment of Sriram Krishnan as an adviser on artificial intelligence to the incoming Trump administration. After this, the situation escalated when former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy in his own style (sic) criticised American culture for allegedly failing to produce enough skilled tech workers. This was followed by the multi-billionaire X owner Elon Musk, a Trump ally, weighing in by supporting the H1B visa program, noting that he himself had come to the US decades ago, through this same program.

Since then, the posts have spiralled, swamping the X platform. The report has subbed this as “an unequivocal and deeply troubling expression of anti-Indian racism.”

“With Musk and Trump both expressing support for the H1B program, the racism and hatred showed no signs of abating. If anything, it only ramped up in intensity and spread. While it may be easy to label such viral hatred as ‘spontaneous,’ the prominence of certain racist themes and tropes, along with their repeated affirmation, presents a compelling case for seeing it as a form of organised, systematic hatred, fanned by powerful actors,” the report further elaborated.

The analysis crucially analysed how the discourse deteriorated and how the “speed with which the distinction between legal or ‘good’ immigrants and ‘illegal’ or ‘bad’ immigrants collapsed in the discussion about Indians and H-1B visas on X is further affirmation of the clear presence of white supremacist ideology on X.” Of the 128 sampled posts, the most viewed post, with 17.4 million views, was shared by the account @leonardaisfunE. It featured a video of a white man mimicking Indian street food vendors, with the user commenting that it was “the funniest shit” she had seen all year. Another post by the account @callistoroll and viewed 12.3 million times, included a video in which a Japanese man described Indian factory workers as incompetent and stupid.

‘Perpetuated stereotypes about Indians’

Deeper analysis showed that 47 of the 128 posts expressed xenophobic sentiments about replacing white workers. Additionally, 35 posts perpetuated the stereotype of Indians being dirty and unhygienic, while 25 focused on public defecation, cow dung, and cow urine.

Of the posts, some claimed claimed that Indians were “inferior to citizens of Western countries, particularly the United States.” Many alleged that Indians had lower intelligence quotients compared not only to white people but also to other immigrant groups. Others juxtaposed images of the interior of a cathedral with Indian slums to promote the supposed superiority of Western civilization.

“The ranking of IQ among groups has a long history in the alt-right white movement: the obsession with IQ is rooted in longstanding eugenicist and social Darwinist ideas that claim that different races possess different IQs. White people are assumed to be at the top of the IQ ladder,” the report stated.  The report has also noted that verbal attacks extended beyond Hindus of Indian or American origin, targeting all those perceived as being of Indian descent, including members of the Sikh community.

Related:

Facebook, Twitter suspend Trump’s accounts

Twitter acts against hate speech, locks hate monger’s account

Twitter deletes trending casteist slur, terms it hate speech

The post ‘Surge in Anti-Indian Hate on X by supporters of Trump is organised, ampflies racism and xenobia’: CSOH Report appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Less than a month after the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin took the extraordinary step of pausing all operations for 24 hours to “address extremism in the ranks.” Pentagon officials had been shaken by service members’ prominent role in the events of Jan. 6.

Of the 884 criminal defendants charged to date with taking part in the insurrection, more than 80 were veterans. That’s almost 10% of those charged.

More remarkable, at least five of the rioters were serving in the military at the time of the assault: an active-duty Marine officer and four reservists.

Service members’ involvement in the insurrection has made the spread of extremism – particularly white nationalism – a significant issue for the U.S. military.

Solving the problem

A blue ribbon committee called the Countering Extremist Activity Working Group was quickly commissioned in April 2021 to evaluate the extent of the problem.

The group found about 100 substantiated cases of extremism in the U.S. armed forces in 2021.

The latest instance occurred in July 2022, when Francis Harker, a National Guard member with white supremacist connections, was sentenced to four years in prison for planning an anti-government attack on police. Harker, who carried a picture saying “there is no God but Hitler,” was planning to attack police officers in Virginia Beach, Virginia, with Molotov cocktails and semi-automatic rifles.

Worried, Austin has tightened the rules regarding political speech within the military. The new rules prohibit any statement that advocates for “violence to achieve goals that are political … or idealogical in nature.” The ban applies to members of the military both on and off duty.

Also, for the first time, the new rules prohibit statements on social media that “promote or otherwise endorse extremist activities.”

While the intent behind the new rules is laudable, political speech – even of an offensive or distasteful nature – goes to the core of U.S. democracy. Americans in uniform are still Americans, protected by the First Amendment and afforded the constitutional right of free speech.

In light of the stricter policy, it is useful to consider how courts apply the First Amendment in the military context.

Good order and discipline

While soldiers and sailors are certainly not excluded from the protection of the First Amendment, it is fair to say they operate under a diluted version of it.

As one federal judge observed, the “sweep of the protection is less comprehensive in the military context, given the different character of the military community and mission.”

The “right to speak out as a free American” must be balanced against “providing an effective fighting force for the defense of our Country,” a federal judge noted in a separate case.

These and other federal judges point to the military’s need for good order and discipline in justifying this approach.

While never precisely defined, good order and discipline is generally considered being obedient to orders, having respect for one’s chain of command and showing allegiance to the Constitution. Speech that “prevents the orderly accomplishment of the mission” or “promotes disloyalty and dissatisfaction” within the ranks harms good order and discipline, and can be restricted.

In 1974, for example, the Supreme Court ruled that the Army can punish an officer for encouraging subordinates to refuse to deploy.

The officer’s comments included: “The United States is wrong in being involved in the Vietnam War. I would refuse to go back to Vietnam if ordered to do so.”

In 1980, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Army could legally fire an ROTC cadet for making racist remarks during a newspaper interview.

Explaining his political philosophy, the cadet said: “What I am saying is that Blacks are obviously further behind the whites on the evolutionary scale.”

In 2012, a San Diego district court ruled that the Marine Corps can lawfully discharge a sergeant who mocked president Barack Obama while appearing on the “Chris Matthews Show.” At one point the sergeant told the host: “As an active duty Marine, I say screw Obama and I will not follow his orders.”

While each of these statements is protected by the First Amendment in civilian life, they crossed the line in military life because they were deemed harmful to morale and represented what one federal court described as more than “political discussion … at an enlisted or officers’ club.”

The military’s job is to fight, not debate

In deciding these First Amendment cases, courts often hark back to why the military exists in the first place.

“It is the primary business of armies and navies … to fight the nation’s wars should the occasion arise,” the Supreme Court said in 1955.

In a separate case, the Supreme Court declared: “An army is not a deliberate body. It is the executive arm. Its law is that of obedience.”

Quickly following orders can mark the difference between life and death in combat.

On a national level, the degree to which an army is disciplined can win or lose wars. A mindset of obedience does not come solely from classroom training but from repeated rehearsals under realistic conditions.

As a military judge observed in a 1972 decision, while service members are free to discuss political issues when off duty, the “primary function of a military organization is to execute orders, not to debate the wisdom of decisions that the Constitution entrusts” to Congress, the judiciary and the commander in chief.

New policy bans ‘liking’ extremist messages

The U.S. military’s revised approach to political speech prohibits retweeting or even “liking” messages that promote anti-government or white nationalist and other extremist groups.

Does a restriction this broad comply with legal precedent?

As a law professor who has served more than 20 years in the U.S military, I believe the broader rules will probably be upheld if challenged on First Amendment grounds.

The most comparable case is Blameuser v. Andrews, a 1980 case from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals where an ROTC cadet espoused white supremacist political views in a newspaper interview.

Amongst other extremist remarks, the cadet told the reporter: “You see, I believe that in the final analysis, the Nazi Socialist Party will take over America and possibly the whole world.”

Finding that the statements harmed good order and discipline, the Seventh Circuit ruled that the Army did not violate the First Amendment when it subsequently removed him from the officer training program.

The cadet’s “views on race relations draw into question his ability to obey commands, especially in a situation in which he regards the military superior as socially inferior,” the Blameuser decision said.

The military has wide latitude in deciding who is deserving of the “special trust and confidence” that comes with military employment. Military officials are free to consider political and social beliefs that are “inimical to the vital mission of the agency” in making hiring and firing decisions, the Blameuser decision said.

Social media posts expressing support for violent political activities will likely be treated in the same way.

As the Seventh Circuit said in Blameuser, by liking or retweeting an extremist message, a service member’s actions are “demonstrably incompatible with the important public office” they hold.

Dwight Stirling, Lecturer in Law, University of Southern California

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Faced with a rise of extremism within its ranks, the US military has clamped down on racist speech, including retweets and likes appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Rashmi Samant, who came into the spotlight after she was asked to resign from her post as Oxford Student Union (OSU) president has been in the news all this month, and now has become a ‘cause’ that scores of right wing ‘influencers’ have also taken up and are amplifying over social media, most effectively on Instagram and Twitter and have now branded it as a case of “Hinduphobia”.

Rashmi Samant, who had become the first Indian woman to told the post of the OSU president, had resigned after old social media posts where she made racist and anti-Semitic comments surfaced. However, she claimed she was bullied and was a victim of “racism and Hinduphobia”. 

A couple of weeks ago, the issue was even spoken about in Rajya Sabha by India’s External Affairs Minister of India by Dr S Jaishankar who said the government will “never ever turn our eyes away from racism. Particularly so when it is in a country where we have such a large diaspora. We’ll take up such matters with great candour when required”. The issue was raised by Ashwini Vaishnaw, BJP MP in the Rajya Sabha who said this “appears to be a continuation of attitudes and prejudices from the colonial areas, especially in the UK.” 

“As land of Mahatma Gandhi, we can never ever turn our eyes away from racism. Particularly so when it is in a country where we have such a large diaspora. We’ll take up such matters with great candour when required”: Dr S Jaishankar on Oxford University’s racism row (ANI) pic.twitter.com/lZm9HO2tmn

— NDTV (@ndtv) March 15, 2021

It was unusual to see a Union minister debate a student union controversy originating in a foriegn university in the Indian Parliament. However, it was the biggest boost to the issue for the right wing inclined media, and social media influencers to make it an “Indian” matter where they alleged that it was a case of “Hinduphobia”. A case in point were social media ‘influencers’ who go by the name Abhi and Niyu and have 1.7 million followers on Instagram, nearly 70,000 on Twitter, and 12.9 lakh subscribers on Youtube. Their video making this allegation is still circulating on social media, and whatsapp groups, amplifying the unproven allegations of Hinduphobia. 

@Rashmidvs was the first President-elect of #Oxford Student Union till she was bullied to such an extent that she had to resign. Her Twitter was suspended and even her parents were dragged in coz they are Ram devotees. This needs to reach masseshttps://t.co/gbPcVqqwcs pic.twitter.com/9VHyqUazhs

— Abhi and Niyu (@abhiandniyu) March 14, 2021

According to a factcheck by Boomlive, Samant, an MSc student at Oxford’s Linacre College, was elected as the first Indian woman president of the Oxford Student Union on February 11, in a “landslide victory”. In her campaign, she had “promised to lobby for decolonising the University and the syllabi, tackling homophobia and transphobia, increase funding for mental health programs for students and get the University to waive residency requirements for students until the WHO declared the end of the Covid-19 pandemic.”

However, student politics is politics too, and soon her old social media posts where she made “racist comments” were discovered. According to the report the “Samant attempted to make a pun on the Holocaust in a 2017 Instagram post. Posing in the Berlin Holocaust Memorial, Samant used the caption “The memorial *CASTS* a *HOLLOW* dream of the past atrocities and deeds. Reflecting on it gives us the power to live with the past vouching for a better future. #holocaustMemorial #uniqueArchitecture”. 

More such posts then surfaced and Samant was reportedly called out for these posts attributed to her. As the issue and her resignation gathered steam online, she later wrote an opinion in News 18 that she quit  because her “values taught me to be ‘sensitive’: sensitive to the feelings of the people who reposed faith in me, sensitive to my convictions that above all we need to respect fellow human beings, and sensitive to the welfare of the student community that deserves a working SU, and at the personal level, sensitive to the effects of cyberbullying that is targeted against me in name of ‘sensitivity’!”

Samant wrote that she was wrongly called “insensitive and racist” based on her older social media posts, adding that “those posts are not a reflection of my hatred towards communities. They were the posts of a teenager who just had access to the world of social media. I again reiterate my apology to those genuinely hurt for my ignorance but not to those with malicious intent who targeted me on ‘insensitivity’.” She alleged that even her apology got “vile reactions” and that she was “discredited and bullied (often through anonymous messages with comments on my race, the colour of skin and upbringing) in various ways in social media.” 

According to Samant, “The incessant bullying drove me to catch the first flight home to India.” Though here she did not claim that this was an attack on her as a Hindu, this is when the right wing eco system seems to have stepped in and taken over the issue. Samant was soon invited on television news shows and scores of right wing individuals spoke up for her, and sometimes for her. She soon began amplifying all those opinions as well.

No Hindu should ever go through the humiliation and harassment that I did, including you!!! It has to stop now!!! https://t.co/AvLc819WVz

— Rashmi Samant (@Rashmidvs) March 5, 2021

However, as reported by Boom and others the Oxford SU Campaign for Racial Awareness and Equality (CRAE) were not convinced by Samant’s explanations and issued a statement: “The repetitive and sustained nature of Ms. Samant’s actions suggest considerable ignorance at best, but active discrimination at worst. The President-Elect has demonstrated unwillingness to take accountability for her actions, which we believe to be a crucial aspect of self-education and making amends.”

Samant announced her resignation on Facebook on February 16 and reportedly apologised for her actions in a statement: “I fully accept my error in not appropriately researching topics before posting about them. In the almost five years since this post, I have changed as a person, scholar, and activist; I am sure many other people have experienced drastic change in themselves and their personal lives in a five-year period. I reaffirm my commitment outlined in my campaign manifesto to continually learning, changing, and bettering myself to serve in this position as well as possible,” she added. 

Meanwhile, UK  police and Oxford University have begun investigations after receiving complaints about the bullying of Rashmi Samant. According to a news report in the Times Of India, “Dr Abhijit Sarkar, an Indian-origin postdoctoral researcher at Oxford University, put up an Instagram post and a photo of her parents indicating they are Hindus, saying: ‘She has come to Oxford from Karnataka, which is a bastion of Islamaphobic far right forces… Far right desi forces … want to reinstate sanatan Hindutva culture … Oxford students are still not ready for ‘Sanatani’ president.”

A complaint was filed by British Indian Satish Sharma, managing director of the global Hindu Federation, has filed a police complaint on Samant’s behalf accusing Sarkar of inciting religious hatred and bullying and harassment. The TOI reported that UK police confirmed it was investigating an alleged hate incident. Samant has initiated her own complaint with Oxford University about Sarkar.

The news report quoted a Oxford University spokesperson who confirmed the investigation and said the university was fully committed to creating an environment where Hindu students and staff can feel welcome, saying, “We have strong policies in place to protect our students and staff against all forms of harassment. An investigation is ongoing.”

Samant is now reportedly continuing her one-year masters online from India and has said she doesn’t “feel safe going back to Oxford. I don’t see any concrete actions by the university and the fact a faculty member has made a statement has emboldened other students who continue to make defamatory statements about me.”

Samant has continued to claim that she had been a target of racism and ‘Hinduphobia’. More fuel for “influencers” out on a right wing mission under various guises, using various tones and tenors so as to appear ‘neutral’. The ones such as Abhi and Niyu have earlier made videos ‘simplyfying’ the farm laws, some on the ‘science’  behind religious practices, and even one titled “The Truth about veer #Savarkar” where they say “it is so sad that people don’t know about his contribution! Let’s say Thank You to him on his birthday”. 

Related

A lady dressed in ripped jeans rips apart eternal ‘Bharatiya’ culture
Freedom of Religion and Christian minorities in India
What is India’s stand on humanitarian aid to those fleeing Myanmar violence?
Battleground Bengal: So, is it Advantage Didi in Singur and its neighbourhood?

The post From Oxford to Whatsapp University, the Rashmi Samant issue has traveled far appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In June 1972 when I first came to America, I lived in a room in Karl Meyer Hall, a residence for doctors in training. The housing was provided by my employer Cook County Hospital in Chicago. I was doing an internship that year with every 4th night on call (emergency duty) which meant about 36 hours of working more or less continuously.

While some of my colleagues from India soon moved out to apartments nearby or miles away, I stayed on at Karl Meyer Hall as it was a 2-minute walk to the hospital. Besides I didn’t know how to drive nor had I any money for several weeks except the five dollars that the Government of India had allowed me in foreign exchange.

My room, though quite small, was comfortable and took care of my needs at the time: a small desk, a bed, a chest of drawers, 2 chairs, a tiny closet, a bedside table with a telephone and a bathroom I shared with another intern – a common passage linking our 2 rooms to it. To me it was a luxury to have hot and cold water running, available then only at super expensive hotels in Bombay.

The County provided housekeeping services too. Juanita- a tall impressive lady, regal in her bearing, with a wide and friendly smile, was the housekeeper for my room. I don’t know how many other rooms Juanita was required to clean. I can still see her, dressed in her uniform, a bluish-green frock and white socks and shoes. The housekeepers came every week day, dusted and vacuumed the room, made the bed, changed the towels and emptied the trash among other things.

I soon realized how lucky I was to have Juanita as housekeeper. She kept the room in a ‘mint’ condition, making it a pleasant refuge when I came back to it after long hours in the hospital. Juanita and I would meet whenever I happened to come by in the afternoon on the days I was not on call. We would chit-chat about this and that.
In those days in India, we, or at least my family hadn’t heard of fitted sheets and had a folded charsa (a thick woven cotton sheet) at the bottom of the bed over the bedsheet (chaddar). So, I was used to rolling over with ease-the charsa covering me at night. I saw that Juanita tucked in the American version of charsa between the mattress and box springs. At night I would pull it out to conform with what I was used to in Bombay.

One night, too tired to pull the charsa out as I fell asleep, I then tried to pull it loose but could not. A bit irritated I got up to see why the charsa would not pry loose and saw to my amazement that Juanita had used large safety pins around the bottom of the bed to prevent me from pulling it out! The next afternoon when in my room, around the time Juanita generally came by to clean it, I asked her why she had pinned the sheet down. “You are such a wriggler. Every day you pull the sheet out” she said, “so I thought this way the sheet would stay in.” It became clear to me that her idea of a bedding and mine were at odds.  So, I suggested she tuck the sheet in but leave an extra sheet at the bottom of the bed, hence her sense of order and my habits could coexist. With a hearty laugh she agreed.

As the weeks passed by, I observed that not every housekeeper was as meticulous or had such high standards as Juanita for whenever she was not there her stand in, a pleasant white woman, would clean the room haphazardly, an indication that Juanita was away.

One day Juanita told me she would be on vacation for a few weeks. “Are you going anywhere,” I asked. “Yes, to Arkansas, that’s where I’m from,” she replied. “How will you go there,” I inquired. “I’ll drive there,” she said.

“How far is it from Chicago,” I asked. “Oh, about 700 miles,” replied Juanita. “Hmm, that’s far,” I said, “I guess it’ll take 2 days?”

“Oh no” came Juanita’s quick answer, “I’ll be there in 7 to 8 hours.”

“How so,” I asked. “Well, once I’m in the car I hit the gas pedal and off I go, I go at 80 miles an hour!”

 “Isn’t that too fast,” I asked. Juanita brushed my concerns aside, “No, it’s fine, I go just a bit over the speed limit, (it was 70) so it isn’t a problem.”

“Well drive safely, enjoy yourself and be back soon” I told her and she nodded happily.

After this I knew that Juanita had no more vacation days left for the year and would be the housekeeper for my room for the 5 to 6 months that remained for me to complete my internship at Cook County Hospital, a source of some relief and joy! A few weeks later I noticed that someone else was cleaning the room as Juanita’s high standard of maintenance was not evident. I wondered about this and hoped she wasn’t ill. Some days later, I happened to bump into Juanita’s colleague in the corridor. I asked her “Is Juanita not well? She hasn’t been coming these past few days.” The lady’s face changed into one of sheer horror. “Don’t you know?” she exclaimed, “Juanita’s daughter was killed by the police last week.”

I was stunned. It was some time before I was able to speak and ask what had happened.

“Well the police went into her building (Juanita’s daughter stayed on the second floor of a 3 flat) and as they were going up the stairs, they heard a sound coming from Juanita’s daughter’s door.” The police proceeded to spray the apartment’s door with a volley of bullets killing Juanita’s daughter. Shocked and uncomprehending how this could possibly be true, I finally stammered a few words asking the lady to page me when Juanita came back to work as I would like to meet her.

Several days later I was paged and went to my room where Juanita was busy with her work routine. On seeing me she sat down as did I. I sat there, not knowing what to say, feeling very inadequate and quite stupid and lowered my gaze to the floor. For a while neither of us said anything. Then Juanita said very softly “The Lord has strange ways.” I continued to be silent but a searing rage welled up in me. I was very angry with God and with the United States…”

Related:

‘We’, not ‘us’ and ‘them’

I can’t breathe
In the US, some cops take a knee, march with protesters in solidarity
Indian hero: Rahul Dubey opens home on Swann Street, DC and shelters protesters
Indian feminists condemn George Floyd’s murder

The post Juanita, and how I was angry with God and the United States appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As most dark skinned Indians, growing up in Independent India will tell you, the colour of our skin determines the first taste of discrimination we ever face. As anyone belonging to a minority faith, especially if you are Muslim or Christian, or belonging to what is called a ‘ backward/ lower caste’, or a marginalised community will tell you, the discrimination on basis of religion and social ‘status’ continues forever. 

Indian racism goes deeper than skin colour, anyone seen as the ‘other’ is considered and treated as sub human, and denied basic rights. It is well known that homes are rented out only when the owner decides your faith is acceptable; even then there are riders like ‘no non vegetarian food allowed’, or worse. 

While race and skin colour have once again become a subject of global discussion, casual racial discrimination on the basis of religion, is still swept under the carpet. Especially in the higher echelons of society, here, back home. India, a multi-faith, multi-lingual, multi-coloured country, which unfortunately is also one of the most racist. 

The discussion came knocking on Indian doors as Former West Indies captain Darren Sammy shared how he was subjected to racial abuse and called a racial slur by his Indian teammates when he played for Sunrisers Hyderabad team in 2013-14 at the Indian Premier League (IPL) matches. He sought an apology from his former teammates who hurled racist remarks at him. 

Indian cricketer, and youth icon Irfan Pathan took the debate further and said: “Racism is not restricted to the colour of the skin. Not allowing to buy a home in a society just because u have a different faith is a part of racism too…” He tagged this as ‘convenient racism’ 

Irfan Pathan, one of the biggest names in contemporary Indian cricket is perhaps the only sports celebrity to have called this discrimination out so far. 

Racism is not restricted to the colour of the skin.Not allowing to buy a home in a society just because u have a different faith is a part of racism too… #convenient #racism

— Irfan Pathan (@IrfanPathan) June 9, 2020

Hell was let lose by the Sanghi Trolls. This statement of Pathan triggered the right wing led troll troops, out they came from the woodwork, one by one. Leading the pack was one Shriraj Nair, who’s twitter bio describes him as a Vishwa Hindu Parishad spokesman. He posted: “Irfan have some gratitude, you got everything from this nation, love,name,fame, money everything and you giving this Gyan shows your true character, just if you want to know what is racism you check with nearly 30 Million left over Hindus in Pakistan.” 

Even in the content of his trolling Nair has shown himself to be an example of what Irfan Pathan has called out as racism. Irfan Pathan never specifically said that only the “Muslim”  was being racially discriminated on basis of faith. But trolls assumed he did because Pathan is a Muslim.  Trolls continued vilifying Irfan Pathan all day, who of course did not respond, and the original tweet went viral. As expected, Irfan Pathan a sports star and an influencer, who also has lakhs of sane fans, and there were plenty who correctly understood what the former cricketer, who has won international accolades for the country, had meant. 

The last time a celebrity had spoken out on communal disharmony he and his family were threatened and trolled from all angles. In 2015, actor Aamir Khan had expressed his opinion on the growing intolerance and rise in religious conflict and violence in India. He had mentioned that his wife Kiran Rao had even wondered if they should move out of the country for the sake of their children. Months later, in February 2016, Snapdeal refused to renew a contract with him as brand ambassador! A year later Aamir Khan received the Vishesh Puraskar from Bhagwat at the 75th Dinanath Mangeshkar Awards function for his performance in Dangal, one of the biggest hits of 2016.

The way Aamir Khan and his ‘Muslimness’ were then trolled, in the days that followed that single comment, had made international news. Those were the first years of the Modi 1 regime. Since then, most Indian film and sports stars have remained at their diplomatic best behaviour. Dining and taking photos with leading politicians, industrialists and also refraining from making comments that may be twisted.

Irfan Pathan has of course spoken about other racial slurs too. As quoted by the Indian Express, Irfan Pathan has also said that though he was not aware of the conversation that Darren Sammy is referring to, but he had seen such discrimination in domestic cricket. “I have seen some issues in domestic cricket where our brothers from South India have to face chants based on their appearance when they travel up north. I think the real issue is education and society needs to learn,” he told IE.

“We still haven’t talked much about racism in India. Sometimes we even call names to our brothers and sisters from the northeast. This problem is deep-rooted and will only go away when we start educating our sons and daughters and that needs to start with proper schooling and parenting,” he added.

Other Indian origin celebrities calling out skin-colour based desi-racism include author and chef Padma Lakshmi who posted: “For years I‘ve been saying that “Fair & Lovely” needs to pack their fake cosmetics and GO!! Anyone else out there sick and tired of being told that fair=lovely? Because, I sure as hell am. I’ve been hearing that crap since my girlhood and it did a number on my self-esteem.”

For years I‘ve been saying that “Fair & Lovely” needs to pack their fake cosmetics and GO!!

Anyone else out there sick and tired of being told that fair=lovely? Because I sure as hell am.

I’ve been hearing that crap since my girlhood and it did a number on my self-esteem.

— Padma Lakshmi (@PadmaLakshmi) June 9, 2020

Indian actor Abhay Deol had earlier ignited a massive debate on top Indian actors endorsing ‘fairness creams’. He posted a long analysis on his instagram feed too: “Fairness creams in India have evolved over the years, from being fairness creams to now using euphemisms like “skin brightening/ whitening”, or “lightening creams”. Most brands no longer want to be associated directly with being termed as ‘fairness creams’. So now we have brands selling “HD glow”, “White beauty”, “white glow”, “fine fairness”, and so on. Over the years these companies have turned their attention towards the Indian Men, who are now trying to be “fair and handsome”, and have dedicated power white ranges for them too.”

Meanwhile, most other Indian actors, sports stars, youth icons have chosen to stay safe and stay quiet on the debate on religious racism and skin colour racism. Their silence speaks loud and clear. 

Related:

The new normal: Aamir Khan, All Smiles, Accepts Award from RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat

The post ‘Convenient racism’, says Irfan Pathan, pointing to discrimination based on faith and colour appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As the coronavirus pandemic spreads its tentacles across the country, yet another a formidable virus, one of racism and communalism , has also raised its ugly head, as if in competition to show it could do more harm to people than a deadly infection.

The spread of the pandemic in India has unearthed the deepest nature of some of the people, whether out of fear of their lives or just due to discrimination that has been brewing in the country for centuries now.

Sabrang India had previously reported at least two instances of racism that people from the northeast of India had faced after they were called ‘Chinese’ and ‘Corona’ and blamed for spreading the virus to India just because of their ethnicity. People from the northeastern India who are settled and living in different parts of the country, face racism daily. They are seen as ‘outsiders’ in their own country. This has affected their social mobility and they are now even scared to venture out of their homes to buy essentials required for survival.

However, it’s not just people from the northeast, but even Dalits and those on the lower rung of the caste based hegemony that has been prevalent in India for decades, who have been discriminated against during the pandemic, often owing to their employment in essential services like sanitation.

The lockdown that the country is placed under to curb the spread of the virus, has freshly brought to the fore the stark discrimination against migrants, who were treated as second-class citizens robbed of their jobs, homes, food and couldn’t go back home to their families.

Not just in life, racism has managed to control people even in death. Below is a list of times that Indians discriminated against Indians, putting Indians to shame.

1.       Nine youth from Nagaland, including six women and three men, were forcibly quarantined in Ahmedabad despite showing no symptoms, no history of foreign travel or contact with a Covid-19 patient. They were simply quarantined on the complaint of some people who had complained that the nine youth could have been carrying the virus because they looked ‘Chinese’.

2.       In the capital, The Indian Express reported that a man first passed lewd comments at a 25-year-old woman in North-west Delhi. When she objected, he spat at her, yelled “Corona” and ran away.

Delhi man spit at Manipur woman by saying her Corona #CoronavirusLockdown pic.twitter.com/xdha4vaTD7

— Nadeem Khoakhar (@nadeemhakim2gm1) March 24, 2020

3.       Despite showing identification, two people from Manipur were denied entry into a supermarket in Hyderabad. An FIR was filed against the store manager and two guards, reported India Today.

#COVID19: Racisim in times of COVID19 continues…: Two person from Manipur were denied entry to buy groceries at Starmarket Grocery shop at Vanastalipuram, Hyderabad on Wednesday.#WeTheNagas #CoronaVirus #Manipur pic.twitter.com/SAIhsaHTKD

— WeTheNagas (@WeTheNagas) April 9, 2020

4.       In Haryana’s Paliwal district, the police arrested three people for allegedly attacking a Dalit family for not switching off the lights at 9 PM on April 5 as suggest by India’s PM Modi to mark India’s fight against the disease, The Indian Express reported. The accused, who were armed with sticks, iron rods and bricks, allegedly used casteist slurs and attacked eight people in the family.

Palwal: Three arrested for beating up Dalit family for allegedly ignoring PM Modi’s lights-out call #Haryana https://t.co/7KAbgitQk2

— Crimes Against Unprivileged (@_UnspokenVoice) April 12, 2020

5.       Newsclick reported that a Dalit woman was beaten up badly when she raised her voice against being denied rations by the ward councillor’s husband team for allegedly not voting for them during the elections. Soon the woman and her son, who had accompanied her to collect rations, were abused with casteist slurs and the verbal attack soon turned into a physical one. She accused the ward councillor’s husband, Amit Sharma, of hitting her on the head with a brick.  

#Atrocities Mamta, 44 yr old Dalit domestic worker was beaten up badly when she raised her voice against not being given rations in Saharanpur, UP.

Mamta is a widow and mother of 2 sons, 1 of whom is physically challenged. pic.twitter.com/TYMv3W8oqe

— The Dalit Voice (@ambedkariteIND) April 17, 2020

6.       In Gorakhpur, a man refused to eat food since it was cooked by a Dalit. Newsclick reported Siraj Ahmad, a native of Bhujouli Khurd village of Kushinagar district, had returned from Delhi on April 9 and was staying at the village isolation centre along with four others. When the village head, Lilawati Devi, in absence of the cook, prepared food for all the people who were in isolation, Siraj refused to eat it, The Telegraph reported.

“Kushinagar isn’t the only district where people have refused to eat food cooked by a Dalit even in quarantine.
Three days ago, the police in Siswa-Baruar village in Basti district had registered a case against 10 people under the Epidemic Diseases Act…” https://t.co/HfMQ1DrdZE

— Gunvant Sarpate (@gunvantsr) April 13, 2020

7.       The Muslim community, which was already under attack during the communal riots in Delhi, faced fresh troubles after the gathering of the Tablighi Jamaat held in mid-march in South Delhi in Nizamuddin West. The community was singled out by the police and government as being solely responsible for the spread of the virus. Lots of communal news reportage followed with some political leaders and news channels accusing the community of ‘Talibani crime’ and calling them ‘human bombs’, ‘Corona bombs’ and accusing them of spreading ‘Corona Jihad’.

Arnab Goswami is spreading communal hatred despite clarification issued by Tabhligi Jamaat of Nizamuddin Delhi. Do we blame all Hindus is some violate Lockdown? Why decry all Muslims? https://t.co/jLKYMsSOxo pic.twitter.com/NMY5G5mpWS

— Jawhar Sircar (@jawharsircar) April 1, 2020

8.       Gujarat’s Ahmedabad Civil Hospital had allegedly divided the wards for coronavirus patients and suspected cases on the basis of religion. The hospital had created a separate ward for Hindu patients and Muslim patients, as per a report by The Indian Express. A patient told the paper: “On Sunday night, the names of 28 men admitted in the first ward were called out. We were then shifted to another ward. “While we were not told why we were being shifted, all the names that were called out belonged to one community,” the patient added. Professor GH Rathod, Surgeon at the Civil Hospital there however denied the report saying that he was misquoted.

Update: The Gujarat Govt denies hospital ward segregation on the basis of faith; @IndianExpress stands by its report. https://t.co/tj5d4c9Hrb pic.twitter.com/JtVpADmWAu

— Mitali Saran (@mitalisaran) April 16, 2020

9.   In Uttar Pradesh, migrant workers were inhumanely sprayed with the same chemical bleach used to disinfect buses in a bid to clean off the coronavirus from their bodies.

“Turn around. Close your eyes tightly.”

A group of migrant workers and families in India were sprayed with a bleach solution to “disinfect” them from #COVID19. pic.twitter.com/ea9rNHX7a5

— AJ+ (@ajplus) April 3, 2020

These above are just ten incidents that have been recorded by the media in recent days. However, there must be scores of such incidents which don’t even come to light because people are scared of being ostracized from the community on reporting. Only the few who have access to community volunteers feel supported to report such inhuman discrimination.

While it looked like India would come together as one during this pandemic, the lax government measures that are yet to reach the poor and a deeply communal news media which often flaunts affinity to the ruling government and its ideologies, spread the racist and communal narrative to an already vulnerable audience.

The minorities in India have been given indifferent treatment for generations. How invisible they are, especially the underprivileged migrants, only became clear when they took to the streets in large numbers to make their voices heard.

Will the people of India take note of the obvious divide being etched out in front of them, or will they turn the other way?

Related:

In defence of a Muslim security guard, who tested negative for Coronavirus
Racists target Indians from North-East amidst Covid pandemic

The post Covid-19: What is India going to do about the Racism and Communalism epidemic that plagues it? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a shocking display of racism, people from North East India are being targeted and accused of spreading the Corona Virus. Covid-19 originated in China, and people from the NE are being accused of being Chinese!

In the first instance, nine youth from Nagaland, including six women and three men, were forcibly quarantined in Ahmedabad despite showing no symptoms or raising any concern that would qualify them for testing. They also had no history of foreign travel or contact with a laboratory confirmed Covid-19 infected patient.

Ahmedabad police landed up at the workplace of 24-year-old Cathy Chakhesang and her fellow Naga coworkers on Friday March 20. Chakhesang told Scroll, “They told the owner of the company that some public had complained about us – that we are carrying the virus because we look like Chinese. We told them we are from Nagaland in India.”

But the police did not listen to them and summoned an ambulance to ferry them to a quarantine center set up at a sports club. At the facility, their temperature was tested and was found to be in the normal range. Yet, they were not allowed to leave and forced to spend the night in the same facility that has used to quarantine people arriving from Australia. Chakhesang shot a video that went viral on whatsapp. Finally, on Saturday March 21, they were allowed to leave.

Meanwhile Ahmedabad police commissioner Ashish Bhatia brushed off the incident. He told Scroll, “Nothing went wrong. It was very simple, they were not subjected to anything, only checking and all was done.” He also appeared to care little about the danger in forcing healthy people to spend time in proximity of possibly unhealthy or infected people by saying, “Everybody is there, [other] people are there for 14 days.” Who is to be held accountable if this quarantine ends up being the reason for one of these young people contracting the virus? Isn’t purposefully endangering the life of a person based on their race, a hate crime? Or is the administration legitimizing racism by claiming it was in public interest?

Meanwhile in the capital, the Indian Express reported that a man first passed lewd comments at a 25 -year-old Manipuri woman in North-West Delhi’s Mukherjea Nagar area. The woman was returning after shopping from gorceries on Saturday evening when the 50-year-old man allegedly first made sexually coloured remarks about her. When she objected, he spat at her, yelled “Corona” and ran away. An FIR has been registered under section 509 at the Mukherjea Nagar police station, and police are looking for the accused. Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal tweeted about the incident saying, “Am shocked to read this. Delhi Police must find the culprit and take strict action. We need to be united as a nation, especially in our fight against Covid-19.”

Related:

Covid-19 Update: Delhi under lockdown, Mumbai lockdown extended

Covid-19: West Bengal goes under lockdown from 5 PM today

Covid-19: Maha Labour Commissioner forbids organisations from firing, reducing wages of workers 

 Doctors need more protective gear now, before COVID-19 cases explode

The post Racists target Indians from North-East amidst Covid pandemic appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

A policeman guards the premises of the Al Noor Mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand on March 23, 2019.PHOTO: AFP
 
On March 15, 2019, 50 Muslims offering their Friday prayers died and 48 injured when they were gunned down in Masjid al Noor mosque in Christchurch and at Linwood Avenue mosque in New Zealand. Brenton Tarrant, a 28-year-old son of an Australian working class family and the gunman behind at least one of the mosque shootings in New Zealand posted his 74-page manifesto making his reasons for the shooting clear. Prime Minister of New Zealand called the attack as a terrorist attack and condemned it strongly and unequivocally as one of New Zealand’s darkest days.
 
There was a world of difference how the media reported the Christchurch mass shooting incident wherein the shooter belonged to the white race and Christian faith and how such incidents are reported when the person involved professes to be a Muslim. London based Daily Mirror’s front page headlines the next day were “Angelic boy who grew into an evil far-right mass killer”. The Daily drew the attention of the reader to the innocence of the shooter in his childhood and sought their sympathies. The story further tried to evoke empathies of the reader by tracing the troublesome situation in which he was. It mentioned, that the blonde little boy had a father who had cancer. The same Daily’s headlines were outright condemning the ISIS shooter involved in Orlando nightclub shooting in 2016 and causing 50 deaths. The headlines then were, “ISIS MANIAC KILLS 50 IN GAY CLUB”. Compare “ISIS maniac” with “Angelic boy”. The former rightly evokes disdain, condemns and censures the killer whereas the latter evokes empathy, tells the reader something went wrong with “person of our race, culture and faith” otherwise an “angel”.
 
The Australian daily – Courier Mail’s front page headlines were “WORKING CLASS MADMAN” and wrote in its opening sentence “Terrorist Brenton Tarrant became twisted by severe addiction to wild video games as he morphed from a curly haired schoolboy into a mass murderer”. The story finds fault with the “wild video games that Tarrant loved to see, once again not finding fault with his ideology or racist attitudes and hatred towards immigrants and Muslims. The Daily found nothing wrong with Tarrant’s 74-page manifesto and launching a war with people of different faith and culture and offered no comments thereon. Western media unequivocally and promptly condemns incidents of terrorism wherein Muslims are involved, as it should be. Section of dominant western media names the religion of the terrorist willy-nilly drawing the entire community in the blame game.
 
They link Islam with terrorism in such incidents. The Daily Telegraph’s headlines while reporting the Orlando nightclub shooting incident was – “SAME SEX JIHAD”. Jihad is popularly linked with Islam.
 
A section of popular media equivocates when the terrorist incident is carried out by a person belonging to a white racist Christian fundamentalist and ultranationalist group describing them as a madman and lone wolf attack. Something went wrong with the individual, they seem to say. As if there was no trace of racism in their culture and body politic and all Christians in the Northern world were most are modern and have the right attitudes. The fault lies with the ‘others’ – those who profess a different religion and are from different race, ethnicity or culture. In the case of terrorist attacks by politically motivated Muslim groups, the cause is located in their religion rather than in the political context. The cause of the attack is attributed to their objective of destroying, what they term as “our way of life”.
 
However, motives of the racist Brenton Tarrant or anti-immigrant Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik, who gunned down 69 participants of a Workers’ Youth League (AUF) summer camp on the island of Utoya on 22^nd July 2011, are not critiqued or condemned.
 
White supremacists, anti-immigrant ultranationalist or Christian fundamentalists are not perceived to be destroying “our way of life”, although that is a bigger threat rather than the political Islamists who carry out terrorist attacks without leaving their footprints except the ghastly toll and enable the state to acquire more authoritarian powers on the pretext of security. Tarrant and Breivik are seen as “us” rather than “them”, whose strategy to achieve their objectives may have gone a bit wrong.  Deep down there is some sympathy with Tarrant and Breivik as they were trying to get their countries rid of “them”, the people who threaten “our” culture and “our way of life”. Tarrant and Breivik haven’t parachuted from anywhere. They are products of the society that has a deep dislike for immigrants and people belonging to other religion, race, ethnicity, language or culture.
 
The covert and subtle racism which exists in a large number of people makes them believe that their race, religion, language or culture is superior and is entitled to various privileges which need to be maintained by institutional structures and force if necessary. That discrimination against “others” is natural. Covert racism allows institutional structures and systems that produce inequalities in wealth, income, the criminal justice system, housing, health care, political power and education among other factors. Covert racism thrives on prejudices against “others” and dehumanizes them. It is this covert racism that gives rise to double standards in dealing with racism or supremacism of all sorts. Covert racism calls ISIS terrorist as a violent maniac and Tarrant and Breivik as angelic boys with whom something went wrong. It is unwilling to question the racism within individuals when they want to know, or media that wants to report, personal stories of angelic boys rather than the plight of survivors of their reckless attack.
 
Covert racism allows racist ideologies and organizations to thrive and individuals to be filled with hatred and anger and take to violent means and terrorist acts. The ideology of “clash of civilization” by Samuel P. Huntington and Ku Klux Klan and many such violent organizations are supported by covert racism. The racist ideologies and organisations in turn nurture, deepen and spread racism. Merely condemning terrorist act is not enough. Civil society and state must identify the covert racism and address it.
 
The Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern is precisely addressing the covert racism within New Zealanders when she enters mosques and condoles the survivors of the terrorist attack and embraces members of Muslim community calling them their own and “us” while calling Tarrant and terrorists as “them”.
 
In the Indian situation, if we replace the word racism with communalism in the above analysis, we get the same result targeting Muslim and Christian community. We have overt communalism in the form of communal riots, demolition of Babri Masjid, mob lynching of Muslims transporting / owning cows alleging them to be cow slaughterers, renaming places and lanes that have Muslim sounding names, when hate speeches is a norm rather than exception and highest political officials and officials of ruling party freely propagate hate speeches which is punishable offence and no action is taken against them. Due to limited space here, we are not listing the hate speeches here which have been dealt with in other issues of Secular Perspective.
 
We know there is widespread prevalence of covert communalism when people nurture prejudices against the Christian community that they indulge in mass religious conversions and their prayer meetings and churches are attacked, when Muslim community is stigmatized to be fast multiplying with the intention to become a majority community within a short span of time, that they are terrorists and all terrorists are Muslims even if all Muslims are not terrorists, that their rightful place is in Pakistan a country to which they are loyal, etc.
 
Covert Communalism has led to decline in socio-economic condition and educational status of the community as pointed out by the Sachar Committee Report, Ranganath Mishra Commission and Amitabh Kundu Committee Report. While terrorists from Muslim community are dealt with the severest punishment in law, as they should be, the terrorists of Samjhauta Express Mecca Masjid bomb blasts, perpetrators of communal violence, mob lynchers of Pehlu Khan belonging to Hindu community are allowed to go scot free.
 
Institutionalized communalism leads to innocent Dr. Kafeel Khan being suspended and victimized for the deaths of more than 60 children in BRD Hospital in Gorakhpur only because his religion happens to be Islam.
 
Muslims and Christians are highly underrepresented in Parliament and state legislatures, in Govt. employment and in the private sector. In several cities, housing societies refuse membership of the society to Muslims and Christians. We could go on listing the exclusion of Muslim and Christian community but these are just a few examples.
 
It is the covert and subtle communalism that does not condemn communal riots, mob lynchings and attack on Christian prayer meetings and Churches; that acquiesces terrorist attacks where most victims are Muslims as in Malegaon, Mecca Masjid, Ajmer and Samjhauta Express while it loudly and unequivocally condemns other terrorist attacks where most victims are from Hindu community to be an anti-national crime demanding severest of punishment.
 
We, however, do not have anybody like Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand.
 
Mahatma Gandhi once made some of us question our covert communalism when he undertook fast unto death when there were communal riots. Societies would not be liberated from the cycle of violence unless covert racism, as well as communalism and supremacism of all hues and colours, is addressed. We need to identify our own covert communalism and address it. There are enough resources in all our religions to do so.
 
In India we believe in “vasudhaiv kutumbakkam” – the entire world is my family; and “ekam sat, vipra bahuda vadanti” – there is one truth, wise people have described it differently. Buddhism teaches us to be rational and compassionate towards all, rather than build communities based on ideologies of superiority and supremacism. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in his Tarjuman-ul-Quran opines that it is compulsory for Muslims to accept all religions to be true. Saint Kabir, Maulana Rumi and Bulleh Shah tell us that love is the essence of all religions. We have Christianity that teaches us equality and ‘love thy neighbour’.
 

The post Opinion: Reflecting on our own racism in India appeared first on SabrangIndia.

MPs have suggested a working definition of Islamophobia for the first time. John Gomez/Shutterstock
 

Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.

The culmination of almost two years of consultation and evidence gathering, the definition takes into account the views of different organisations, politicians, faith leaders, academics and communities from across the country. It also takes into account the views of victims of hate crime.

Islamophobia is still a relatively new word which entered the public and political lexicon little more than two decades ago. Yet, the process of establishing a working definition of Islamophobia has been ongoing and one that I have contributed to in various different ways.

In the hope of bringing about a more consistent and coherent approach to tackling Islamophobia, the drive for a working definition has been underpinned both by the need to help people better understand what Islamophobia is and isn’t, and also to record levels of Islamophobic hate crime.

For detractors however, Islamophobia is a problem for a number of reasons. Some, such as the writer Melanie Philips claim that Islamophobia just does not exist, that it is a mere “fiction”. Yet data on hate crimes against Muslims from the Metropolitan Police and Tell MAMA among others render such claims wholly unfounded.

Others such as the Quilliam Foundation find the term problematic, suggesting that it shuts down debate. At the most extreme, commentators such as Rod Liddle claim there just isn’t enough Islamophobia.
 

Comparisons with racism

Irrespective of whether the new working definition of Islamophobia has the potential to counter these narratives, it has much to offer. Short and accessible, the new definition is neither too complex nor overly academic, which maximises its potential appeal to both public and political audiences.

Celebrating Eid at Leeds Grand Mosque in Yorkshire. Danny Lawson/PA Archive

Aligning Islamophobia with racism is also likely to be helpful, because people intuitively “get” racism, and the majority deem it to be unwanted and unnecessary in today’s Britain. The same needs to be true for Islamophobia where people “get” that a Muslim woman being physically assaulted is equally unwanted and unnecessary.

Drawing comparisons with racism does have the potential for some confusion, not least in conflating religion with “race”. While religion has the potential to be changed and chosen, race is largely fixed and unchanging. This means it will be important to explain clearly that the comparison with racism is made to highlight similarities between the functions and processes of Islamophobia, rather than suggesting Muslims constitute a race. In this way, the new definition emphasises how Islamophobia targets markers of “Muslimness” and Muslim identity – evident in how perpetrators of Islamophobic hate crime disproportionately target visibly Muslim women – in the same way that racism often targets people for the colour of their skin.

Given the new definition’s emphasis on Muslimness and Muslims, this should go some way to allaying fears that it’s Islamophobic to not share the same beliefs as Muslims or disagree with some of their practices. Clearly it is not. Nor is it Islamophobic to appropriately criticise Muslims or condemn atrocities committed by any group or person who might claim to be acting in “the name of Allah” (or similar). But, as the new definition rightfully infers, if disagreements, criticisms or condemnations are used to demonise or vilify all Muslims without differentiation, then it’s likely at least some Islamophobic views will be underpinning such an approach.

The new working definition goes beyond merely replicating the working definition of antisemitism that was put forward by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance before being adopted by the British government in 2016. While I’ve previously advocated substituting Islamophobia for antisemitism as a quick and easy solution to the ongoing definition problem, the complexity and fallout from recent allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party highlight the weaknesses and deficiencies of such an approach. Having two separate definitions for Islamophobia and antisemitism ensures that critical – and necessary – distance between the two phenomena is maintained.
 

What people do and say

While the working definition is a welcome development, it’s worth remembering that it is only a recommendation. Whether the government intends to adopt it or not is unclear at this stage.

As a catalyst for change, however, the definition is right to be more concerned with what people do and what they say, rather than laying claim to what or who they are. Using the definition to merely call out potential Islamophobes has the very real potential to be wholly counter-productive. Instead, it must be used to build new constituencies and alliances that can work together to advocate for change.

While the working definition is unlikely to appease those who ultimately deny Islamophobia’s existence, if it draws attention to Islamophobia and its negative consequences, that can only be a good thing. My hope is that it will also draw attention to how Islamophobia impacts the lives of many ordinary Muslims going about their lives in today’s Britain. This should neither be dismissed nor underestimated.
 

Chris Allen, Associate Professor in Hate Studies, University of Leicester

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Why UK’s working definition of Islamophobia as a ‘type of racism’ is a historic step appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Black Lives Matter protesters kneel and raise their hands in London’s Oxford Street – 8 July 2016. Credit: Flickr/Alasdair Hickson. CC BY-NC 2.0.

When I read this in the morning paper, my heart stopped: Just 40 minutes away from me, the white mother of black children in New Jersey was repeatedly harassed via Facebook by a stranger, who told her that her children should be hung.

Kentucky police arrested the young white man on Oct. 18, as he was backing out of his driveway with weapons, 200 rounds of ammunition and plans for shooting up a nearby school. The authorities thanked the mom — Koeberle Bull of Lumberton, New Jersey — for alerting them.
I’m the white grandfather of a family of mostly black children. Someone armed and active is so offended by a mixed-race family that he wants to kill children like mine. Supported by my white daughter Ingrid, I allowed the terror to move through me while I raged and cried.

After a while, when the intensity of my feelings lessened, Ingrid asked, “Isn’t it time to go on the offensive against racism?”

I needed to access positive energy. While I was still identifying with the New Jersey mom and immersed in the feelings of fear, the ideas running through my head were all about defense.

That’s the intention of terror, after all, whether it’s expressed in packages of bombs sent to prominent people or conducting a massacre in a Jewish synagogue in Pittsburgh. I was gripped by my human programming: When under attack, defend!

When I released enough fear to be able to think again, I could hear Ingrid’s question and access my strategy brain. Strategy urges the opposite of fear’s reactivity. Mohandas K. Gandhi, observing Indians reacting against the British Empire, urged his people to go on the offensive. Military generals agree with Gandhi: Wars can’t be won by staying on the defense.

For its part, folk wisdom couldn’t be clearer: “The best defense is a good offense.”

Despite this, many Americans at this moment — perhaps especially activists — are locked into reactivity and defense. I see the resulting frustration when I observe activists attacking each other. Going on the offense has different outcomes: It builds healthier movement cultures and shifts our focus to winning over allies in an expanding struggle.

What an offensive against racism looks like.
I often heard Bayard Rustin, a senior strategist for Martin Luther King Jr., say at the height of the civil rights movement, “We’ve got to change our economic system or in 50 years we’ll still have ugly racism!”

He’s backed up by a trio of political scientists who recently studied polarization in the United States. They found that polarization was directly linked to economic inequality. In other words, the economic elite that makes the basic decisions in the United States has, since the Reagan revolution, dramatically increased inequality and therefore accelerated polarization.

But what does polarization have to do with the violent expression of racism?

Even though racism is an integral part of American culture, how strongly it is felt and expressed varies on a spectrum, from subtle stereotyping and micro-aggressions on one end to the would-be Kentucky shooter on the other. That means there is always some racial hatred around; we need to just face that. What usually keeps people from violently acting out their hatred is the social context.

Polarization releases people to act out their hatred. In the 1920s economic inequality deepened, polarization grew, and the Ku Klux Klan was everywhere. It’s not only racism that’s released by polarization. As society heats up movements on the left grow, too. That’s why we saw powerful movements for progressive change in the 1930s, even while the American Nazis were busy recruiting.

The biggest mistake 1930s activists could have made was going on the defensive because, as it turns out, it was exactly the time to go on the offensive. Thankfully, that’s what they did. The result was the biggest decade of gains for American progress in the first half of the 20th century. Historic breakthroughs on racial integration of industrial unions were made in that very period.

In the 1960s, bombings of Mississippi black churches became epidemic, along with killings of black people and their white allies — even in broad daylight. Nonviolent civil rights leaders understood this dynamic.

King and his comrades were clear that the remedy is to take the offensive, and the movement won gains that, at the time, appeared to be impossible. The economic emphasis of Rustin and A. Philip Randolph also gained support. The 1963 March on Washington — dreaded by President John F. Kennedy and most Democratic Party leaders — significantly named itself the March for Jobs and Freedom, attracting significant trade union support.

King modeled for all of us what offensive strategizing looks like, as illustrated in the outstanding film Selma. He felt his feelings about the latest outrage, but instead of letting his feelings control his behavior he channeled the energy into action aimed at changing institutions. The more that vicious attacks targeted him and his people, the more clearly he saw that injustice is reinforced by the economic structure. Increasingly he linked racism and poverty to capitalism.

As the current political turbulence swirls around us, the need grows for models of grounded campaigns that take the offensive and make the racial and economic connections. One example is the Power Local Green Jobs campaign in North Philadelphia, which incorporates a strong racial and economic justice dimension.

Most activists can find ways to connect the dots even if their primary issue is gun control, sexism, incarceration, rights for trans people, peace or raising the minimum wage. Progress on many issues is opposed by the economic elite, whether acting through Donald Trump or Congress or state governments. The only way to break this opposition is to push the economic elite out of its position of dominance, so we can make the required changes toward equality (both economic and racial) and enjoy the social peace that results.

Three steps help put us back on the offensive.
The good news is that activists, by taking three strategic steps, can dramatically increase our power and effectiveness. The steps are not rocket science — in fact, they are perceived by people outside the activist bubble as common sense steps to take.

1. Shift away from reactive, one-off demonstrations. Protests can be emotionally satisfying, but they rarely produce change. Again, the black-led civil rights movement showed its strategic brilliance by focusing on campaigns rather than episodic protests. A campaign has a specific demand for change, a target (the deciders who can yield to the demand) and an escalating series of actions that build the campaign. Campaigning doesn’t guarantee winning, but it increases the chance of success from near-zero using one-off demonstrations to a chance that’s better than even.

2. Link the network of campaigns on an issue into a movement. That movement can result in the movement winning in the big picture, even if some specific campaigns within the movement don’t win. The military analogy is that generals don’t expect to win every battle, but if they retain the initiative they do expect to win the war.

Linking campaigns into a movement also promotes the learning curve of the campaigners, by comparing themselves to each other. They learn how to figure out the opponent’s vulnerabilities and how to sustain themselves over time.

3. Create a vision of what justice looks like. While the Occupy movement changed the conversation, it was held back partly by its lack of a concrete vision of what should replace the unjust status quo. Fortunately, the Movement for Black Lives issued a vision draft in 2016 that has gathered endorsements by many national and grassroots groups.

The hope for a movement of movements that can amass enough power to push the 1 percent out of dominance lies, I believe, in taking at least these steps. A series of nonviolent direct action campaigns that stay on the offensive can build vision-led movements that — finding themselves facing the same opponent — create a coalition and win.

That is the shift that can make possible, at long last, a decisive win against racism.

George Lakey has been active in direct action campaigns for six decades. Among many other books and articles he is author of “Strategizing for a Living Revolution” in David Solnit’s book Globalize Liberation (City Lights, 2004). His 2016 book is “Viking Economics,” and in December 2018 Melville House will release “How We Win: A Guide to Nonviolent Direct Action Campaigning.”
 

The post It’s time to go on the offensive against racism appeared first on SabrangIndia.