Ugh, this is so depressing, I want to vomit.

Maybe the cartoonist is merely saying Osama is a $#!+head... ;)

*vomits*

I'm sure people like this nice Japanese soldier were upset at those terrible propaganda posters about them...

Vikram, it doesn't say your enemy is a Japanese soldier it says your enemy is THE JAP.

Is this your enemy?

Vikram

You missed the point by about a hundred miles

Is this your enemy?

The WWII poster depicted a Japanese soldier.

You missed the point by about a hundred miles

Perhaps you need to see how cartoonists in the Arab media express themselves

Perhaps you need to see how cartoonists in the Arab media express themselves

Sure, because two wrongs always make a right.

Vikram, the very first propaganda poster says:
"Don't talk, rats (image of a Japanese person) have big ears"
I doubt they meant that the Japanese government could hear across the Pacific, they meant Japanese-American civilians in the USA. Sure, the image depicts a rat in a uniform, but the point they're making is that all Japanese are the enemy.

The Cooksey quote and the Sodhi killing, both despicable acts, were from Sept 2001. Cooksey apologized days after, and Roque, the shooter, was sentenced to death.

The toilet paper cartoon is from August 2005.

Isolated incidents in a country of 295 million comparable to the number of hate crimes/talk against other ethnic / religious groups. Both punished in a just manner. Cooksey will be painted as a virulent racist despite having this on his resume

Cooksey made five mission trips to the remote Maua Methodist Hospital in Kenya, where he performed eye surgery. After his first trip in 1986, he returned home and raised enough money through private donations to build a modern eye clinic at the Maua Hospital to be used by local and visiting ophthalmologists.

Woe is us, rapidly descending into a cesspool of internment camps, revocation of freedom religion. Why I hear they're not going to let girls wear their headcoverings in school and that a Muslim filmmaker critical of Christianity was impaled while motoring around town. Did you see the movie, Sum of All Fears or the current season of 24, isn't it ridiculous all the steroetyping of Arabs and Muslims?

They're called caricatures. They're in the editorial pages everyday.

Sure, because two wrongs always make a right.

Never does, but picking a few random tasteless cartoons from the media here is a bit of an unbalanced view, considering that such tastelessness is the norm in the Arab media. Just as much as all tv shows are not of the Jerry Springer caliber.

I doubt they meant that the Japanese government could hear across the Pacific, they meant Japanese-American civilians in the USA. Sure, the image depicts a rat in a uniform, but the point they're making is that all Japanese are the enemy.

Ah I see, the Japanese were very sensitive in their depiction of the West... like this ?

Of course Japanese propaganda art did not neglect to target the enemy. In a manner similar to what American did by depicting the Japanese as subhuman apes, the Japanese countered with their own depiction of Americans (and the British as well) as hairy, demonic mongrels.

Comparison Between Japanese and American
Propaganda during World War II

IfI and Vikram: You're drawing some weird, insecure, backward-looking moral equivalences. The point is to improve the country we live in. Is 'at least we're better than Saudi Arabia and imperial Japan' something to brag about?

They're called caricatures. They're in the editorial pages everyday.

So was Step'n Fetchit. That li'l guy really cracked me up! </sarcasm>

Never does, but picking a few random tasteless cartoons from the media here is a bit of an unbalanced view, considering that such tastelessness is the norm in the Arab media. Just as much as all tv shows are not of the Jerry Springer caliber.

Lets see Manish mentions racist things said by a Louisiana senator.
You retort by saying that the Arabs IN THE MIDDLE EAST do/say worse things.
So you are implying that -
1. There is nothing wrong with being an American racist because Arabs are racist too.
2. Its not racist because Arabs do it too.
3. Whats the big deal because the Arabs do it too.
4. The Arabs do it so when the Americans do it, its only fair/revenge.

Just the fact that when Manish brings up something racist an American has done, you feel incumbent upon yourself to bring what those Arabs do makes you at best an apologist for the racist Americans and in my opinion a House Negro.

We can always improve.

Speaking of those two cases you listed...in what ways can we improve?

Cooksey is not a representative anymore. Our entire society condemned his comments. Every mention of his name in the newspaper will have that quote. President Bush visited a mosque that same day and praising Islam as a great religion and a religion of peace.

The shooter was sentenced to death.

Like I said, justice has been done.

What more would you have done in these cases? Or do you expect the world to be absolutely pristine and nothing ever to go wrong.

You're drawing some weird, insecure, backward-looking moral equivalence

My posting was to point out that the WW II poster was a symptom of those times. Both sides created such propaganda. To post only one side of the story is an unbalanced view of history. You drew the one sided equivalence to it in your original post. If cartoons like the one you posted were a common occurence, then it would be an issue. Unfortunately even such crap has to be tolerated like the KKK under the First Amendment.

So was Step'n Fetchit. That li'l guy really cracked me up!

Once again a caricature from decades ago . I thought you weren't interested in backward looking ?

Just the fact that when Manish brings up something racist an American has done, you feel incumbent upon yourself to bring what those Arabs do makes you at best an apologist for the racist Americans and in my opinion a House Negro.

If you cannot debate the subject without making this a personal attack, then perhaps you shouldn't participate. The moderators I thought were strict about that. None of my comments were personal attacks on any of the posters. Perhaps you should try some civility.

... justice has been done.

This was published yesterday and this, today.

... the WW II poster was a symptom of those times...

Today.

Once again a caricature from decades ago.

Today.

If you cannot debate the subject without making this a personal attack, then perhaps you shouldn't participate. The moderators I thought were strict about that. None of my comments were personal attacks on any of the posters. Perhaps you should try some civility.

Ha!
Thats rich coming from a person who tries to give context to statements like

“If I see someone (who) comes in that’s got a diaper on his head and a fan belt wrapped around the diaper on his head, that guy needs to be pulled over,” [Louisiana Congressman] Cooksey said. [Link]

May I suggest that you develop a thick skin because thats what you context providers tell us when we complain.

Just because racism isn't an exclusively American phenomenon doesn't make it any less racist. What next, let's make torture legal because it is in many countries in the Middle East (including Israel, by the way)?

Quick, I'll race ya to the bottom!

Vikram,

Manish pointed out a media trend that is pretty much what the more pessimistic among us expected. I read the post with disgust leavened by Manish's sarcastic humor. Good to know, but I'm not going to picket in the streets over it. But you just went and added depth to this whole issue by being the sort of kapo who will find justification for just about anything done by those civilizing, democratizing westerners. "yes, sahib. That coolie will be beaten most severely. More nimbu panni?"

I agree that this is offensive.

I sent her a polite -- but I hope not obsequious -- email to let her know I found it offensive and explain why.

Hi, I found your cartoon today ("Osama is Here") offensive.

I'm a turban-wearing Sikh and a U.S. citizen. In recent years I've frequently been insulted via derogatory slurs such as "towelhead" and "raghead." It's not the end of the world -- one gets used to hardships of this sort -- but it still hurts. And it's still un-American.

Your cartoon traffics in a similar kind of mean-spirited rhetoric. With Bin Laden's turban as toilet paper, the cartoon goes beyond reasonable caricature into the terrain of an ethnic-religious slur. It's one thing when a joker on the street uses this kind of language, but it's another when a major editorial cartoonist uses it. It is, in my view, irresponsible and unacceptable, just as anti-black and anti-Jewish slurs and stereotypes are unacceptable.

I'm not asking for anything -- and don't worry, I'm not trying to start a boycott. But I would ask that you keep in mind that such images can make life a little bit harder for Americans like me, and refrain from using this kind of image in the future.

Amardeep Singh

It's just a small thing (I'm sure many of you would be a little more direct and less wordy...), but maybe if she gets a few letters she'll think twice about publishing this type of thing again.

So was Step'n Fetchit. That li'l guy really cracked me up!

That caricature was insulting to all blacks. Toilet paper on Osama's head is insulting to him, who may I remind you, wants to install the Caliphate over all our crushed skulls and liberal ideals. Again, I point at the editorial pages. There are an abundance of caricatures of people in the news of every ethnic group. Most people aren't so hypersensitive, because they know it's aimed at the individual, not the group.

Ugh. Can we do away with the house-negro/coolie-type retorts please? There are other far better arguments to be made (and mercifully have been in this string)

I sent her a polite -- but I hope not obsequious -- email...

Sandy's a dude.

If you cannot debate the subject without making this a personal attack, then perhaps you shouldn't participate. The moderators I thought were strict about that. None of my comments were personal attacks on any of the posters.

funny how you resort to this every time you feel threatened, or hoisted by your own petard. "Moderator! Moderator!"

Btw, Vinod requests that people stop calling conservatives 'House Negro' or 'Uncle Tom' and debate the issues on their merits. I agree, it's pointlessly corrosive and ad hominem.

Sandy's a dude

How ironic!, Sandy is sometimes used a short form for sand nigg*r. BTW, Bush is shown as a rapacious rat with a taste for oil. What is the Rorschach analysis on that?

SMR, sorry, you're right. But I'd like to point out that I used kapo as the slur, not coolie.

That caricature was insulting to all blacks. Toilet paper on Osama's head is insulting to him,

Dude Vikram - Havnt u learnt by now that opinions contrary to what people here want to believe are not welcome here esp if u have a FOB opinion. As the moderators here have made it clear b4, this is a site for "2nd generation dudes only - preferably liberal"

What I have learnt is : Save urself some insults and post only if u think similarly, or on non serious issues or else go to a different forum where everyone thinks like u.

Welcome to circlejerk land my friend.

Babloo, I thought the Huffaker cartoon was pretty funny, and didn't get why Manish posted it until I saw the toilet paper. Apparently, in order to counterbalance the portrayal of Musharraf as a political panderer, and Bush as a oil-hungry warmonger....Osama needed toilet paper on his head. It makes that particular slur ok, acceptable, and somehow symbolic of ObL's crimes (since the guy didn't come up with much else to satarize him.) It's an easy, needless, tasteless shortcut...and should make anyone with a profile-worthy complexion rather uneasy.

Aten, I'm a FOB. I've been here for many years now, so maybe not so fresh...but I'm still an immigrant. So I don't see how you can speak of some unified fob opinion. "The other side does it too!" is generally not considered a great argument, so if people here shredded it, I don't see how we're suddenly standing in a circle.

Dude Vikram - Havnt u learnt by now that opinions contrary to what people here want to believe are not welcome here esp if u have a FOB opinion. As the moderators here have made it clear b4, this is a site for "2nd generation dudes only - preferably liberal"

Aten,

You don't have to be liberal to be vigilant about racial and religious slurs. You just have to have some self-respect.

And also, you'd be surprised at how widely read Sepia Mutiny is amongst Indian bloggers and blog-readers in India. It's not just an ABCD thing. Do a Technorati search; you'll see.

What I have learnt is : Save urself some insults and post only if u think similarly, or on non serious issues or else go to a different forum where everyone thinks like u.

Oh the persecution!

Aten, I think you're being unfair. Most of the spitting and hissing happens in the comments section - by other readers, not the moderators. And just the fact that those comments remain on the site should tell you that they're perfectly happy leaving in other points of view.

Oh, and btw, I'm FOB and proud of it. I'd appreciate it if you didn't generalize and speak for me.

thanks Cicatrix. Please let's NOT start again with the tired old FOB v. ABCD/South Asian crap again that only serves to insult, marginalize and isolate a portion of mutineers. It's so tedious, and obviously after 900 threads on the topic the only thing we've found is that not everyone agrees. No big shock there.

Dude Vikram - Havnt u learnt by now that opinions contrary to what people here want to believe are not welcome here esp if u have a FOB opinion. As the moderators here have made it clear b4, this is a site for "2nd generation dudes only - preferably liberal"

I am beginning to think that there is truth to this underlying ideology. Well, if people cannot have a debate from all sides of the spectrum (isn't that what this web site is purported to be ?), then in what way is it any different from the close minded people who opinions are being dissected in most of the threads. If people are so quick to call me names and labels, then I think it more reflects on their mentality than anything else. Ah well, it is friday, you folks have a good weekend.

Don't you find all political cartooning sort of, well, vile? Was there ever a time when political cartooning didn't trend toward the very worst instincts? Toilet paper rolls, political leaders as devils or satans, fangs and all, really, it so very often veers off into yuckiness. Which is not to excuse any one particular cartoon. It's all gross caricature. I never find any of them funny, and the cartoons certainly don't make me think in any new way about an issue. They do nothing to change my mind. Why do newspapers even have them? They should just have a blank space instead, with a caption that says: draw your own version of little hatreds and predjudice here. You too can demonize here: look, all Democrats are traitors to country and cause. Look, all Republicans are war-mongering devils. That way, everyone may be happy.

Your favorite libertarian-conservative, i.e. House (insert standard derogatory term here) signing off.........

Btw, Vinod requests that people stop calling conservatives 'House Negro' or 'Uncle Tom' and debate the issues on their merits. I agree, it's pointlessly corrosive and ad hominem.

Ok I will stop calling people HNs.
Btw I would never call a thoughtful conservative like Vinod or MD a HN. I reserve that for brown Western apologists who defend everything Western not on merits but because its Western.
I will restrain myself in future.

MD, I see your point, and very much respect it, but I think of political cartooning as one of the greatest freedoms of speech. Often cuts straight to the heart of the matter, brings the flaws in each argument squarely front and center, knocks down pompous politicians down a peg, slyly says what everyone's thinking but can't say for fear of recrimination and outrage....a great cartoon can do as much as, if not more than, a great editorial, I think. Of couse, when bad, it's nothing more than glib, inflammatory, name calling.

From what I can see of huffaker's work, he's not bad.. which makes the toilet paper all the more disappointing.

What's somewhat problematic in this chain of comments is not that the cartoon is insulting to many desis, which it clearly is. It is that our response is the ineffectual comments indicating our exasperation at the racism of the American majority, the letters begging them to treat us fairly, etc. etc.

That's ridiculous.

This sort of cartoon is exactly what one could reasonably expect from the American imperial media. Nothing particularly wrong with that. Its what the Romans were probably saying about the Visigoths 2000 years ago.

But the answer is not trying to get in the good graces of the American elite. Unless and until desis have the power (primarily economic, somewhat military) to stand up to the American imperalist regime, little can be accomplished. That is a pretty good goal though, and achievable in my mind.

After all, the Romans laughed a lot less at the Visigoths after Rome was sacked.

Well, if people cannot have a debate from all sides of the spectrum (isn't that what this web site is purported to be ?), then in what way is it any different from the close minded people who opinions are being dissected in most of the threads.

Vikram, If you take a look at SM's comment threads since it began last year, you will see that "debate from all sides of the spectrum" is more than tolerated. People certainly might disagree with your opinions, but it is irresponsible to say that debate and discussion of differing view points is outlawed here.

Vikram,
I am FOB. I would hate it if, due to a feeling that this site only caters to ABCD opinions/ or only liberal views, you decide not to put out your views.
If the comment section became an echo chamber of ABCD liberal views than it will be a sad loss.

Wow..slow down there Hari Chandra...you just blew me waaaaay past my perch on the liberal end of the Sepia spectrum. What exactly are you advocating by Unless and until desis have the power (primarily economic, somewhat military) to stand up to the American imperalist regime? Military?

Don't you find all political cartooning sort of, well, vile?

I suppose there's a reason they are pictures and not words... to make it easier on the target audience?

er, that should be

you blew waaaaay past my perch.

(very poor motor skills. sorry!)

After all, the Romans laughed a lot less at the Visigoths after Rome was sacked.

What are you going to do, fly a few planes into some skyscrapers?

RC,
There is a time line for the F in the FOB ;
You have been posting here for a while as a FOB.

Cicatrix:

OK, so I was exaggerating a bit and doing my best JNU-prof imitation rant about American imperalists, which I don't *really* believe.

I do believe that nations, and their primary cultural outlets, trend to treat other nations, and people relating to that nation, differently based on their standing in terms of global power.

Its not reasonable to expect that the U.S. media would treat South Asians with any level of respect, given the lack of general South Asian influence on the world. Influence in today's world, I think, is primarily economic, though partly military as well. I think that finding some equals to the U.S., economically and otherwise, might add to some more humility in the press.

Vikram, as you can see, the tides turn often at Sepia, so no need to feel so persecuted.

Punjabi Boy:

I was thinking more in terms of buying trillions of dollars worth of U.S. treasury bonds (as China does today)

I was thinking more in terms of buying trillions of dollars worth of U.S. treasury bonds (as China does today)

Why do you feel the need to 'sack Rome'? Why not just live in peace with everyone?

Bad analogy: Was trying to tie back to the previous visigoth comment. Could just as easily said, "Decline of Rome". I'm not much into violent solutions either.

the letters begging them to treat us fairly, etc. etc.

Hari Chandra,

That is a slanted and uncharitable way of reading a letter expressing a feeling of offense.

You start by telling someone they've said something wrong. (If you don't tell them, they might not know it.) Then you see what happens. If you get nada, you go for global media domination or whatever.

With earlier outrages like the Power 99 call center flap in Philly or the Hot 97 "Tsunami song" in New York, SMers started out writing lots of letters and making calls to the radio stations and found that nothing happened. But when they went to advertisers and the other MSM started covering it, the stations had to take notice.

In this case, there is just one person responsible for this cartoon, and it's not likely to reach as many people as, say, a radio station. It's possible he might be responsive to polite complaints. Again, I insist that this is a reasonable and civilized approach -- it is unfair to call it begging.

If you're really offended, you don't have to write him at all; you can write people at the newspapers and websites that carry him.

This is infact a pro-liberal Democrat-leaning political cartoon.

The point of the cartoon is not to show Arabs as toilet-roll wearers, the point is to show that GW is not really intersted in pushing Gen. Mushy to drive extremist elements out of Pakistan. And the reason Gen. Mushy does not want to drive extremist elements out of Pakistan is because that would not win him lots of popularity votes.

“If I see someone (who) comes in that’s got a diaper on his head and a fan belt wrapped around the diaper on his head, that guy needs to be pulled over,” [Louisiana Congressman] Cooksey said.

I happen to be very sensitive to racial profiling but seriously, this is about Osama. It is unclear if the intent of the caricaturist was to insult the turban. It is alarmist to immediately infer a racial slur from this. Although the Seinfeld joke is well chosen.

To sum up quickly then:
Vikram and Co, lose debating points for bringing in the 'two wrongs may make a right' argument. Aten loses points for making it personal. And more points for failing to realize that the cartoon itself is very liberal.
Manish loses points for making the rather tenuous leap from Osama -> all Arabs. Oh, and failing to get the gist of the cartoon.

Hari Chandra, thanks for explaining. I mutter the same to myself, darkly and under my breath whenever Shepard Smith, Roger Ailes, et al bob up like worm-ridden apples to deliver their latest smears, smiling those horri-

uh, sorry..(turning off Air America) ..what was I saying?

Seriously though, I'm all for economic growth, but wanting military might in order pound 'humility' into someone else is a terrifying proposition. Also, contradictory. don't you think?

Amardeep:

You are correct and I apologize. I'm not sure entirely inspired my previous rant.

this is a site for "2nd generation dudes only - preferably liberal

I disagree with the 2 nd generation part but you definitely have to be liberal and the way these guys define it.

Humor as you and I understand (a slight exaggeration of the behavior,accent or appearance of a certain group of people) is actually lack of pride in oneself or one's ethnicity.

You should definitely believe I feel, therefore I am.

Vikram and Co, lose debating points for bringing in the 'two wrongs may make a right' argument. Aten loses points for making it personal. And more points for failing to realize that the cartoon itself is very liberal. Manish loses points for making the rather tenuous leap from Osama -> all Arabs. Oh, and failing to get the gist of the cartoon.

???

whether the cartoon is "liberal" or "conservative," "democrat" or "republican," is beside the point.

the point is that the cartoonist, in depicting osama wearing a toilet roll and paper, played into two linked stereotypes, both false and harmful -- indeed, deadly.

one, that turbans are akin to toilet paper,

two, that turbans are a marker of extremism and terrorism.

depicting george bush as a rodent isn't going to get anyone killed. ridiculing turbans by associating them with defecation (btw, how's that for a link with the other thread?) and, to add injury to insult, stigmatizing turban wearers as extremists, is ammunition for the idiots who beatdown or kill sikhs and other wearers of similar gear.

peace

AM,
I am going by the definition of those born and for most part grew up in 'Des' as FOB v/s those born in the US.
Its all good.

Humor as you and I understand (a slight exaggeration of the behavior,accent or appearance of a certain group of people) is actually lack of pride in oneself or one's ethnicity.

What exactly does this mean? Since you're definitely-not-a-bleeding-heart, I don't quite understand why you're so touchy....

Ugghhh... Shepard Smith

Cicatrix:

I am no fan of military buildup, but in today's world, I wouldn't mind my economic growth protected by a reasonable phalanx of mirage fighers.

To take India as an example, the alternative could be Nepal falling into Maoist hands and a million Chinese troops amassed on our border, depending whatever it was they demanded back in 1962 (god knows what that was, I recall it being Arunachal Pradesh)

second sentence to read, "demanding whatever it was..."

This is infact a pro-liberal Democrat-leaning political cartoon.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making.

... this is about Osama. It is unclear if the intent of the caricaturist was to insult the turban.

Either unlikely or tin-eared, like calling someone a coon and then protesting you're referring to their resemblance to wildlife:

Offensive terms for Arabs... Towelhead, Raghead or Diaperhead, referring to the head coverings worn by some Arab men.

Also see the quote from the illustrious Congressman from Louisiana, the movie Towelhead, and the long history of this slur as applied to Middle Easterners, Sikhs and desis in the U.S.

The point of the cartoon is not to show Arabs as toilet-roll wearers, the point is to show that GW is not really intersted in pushing Gen. Mushy to drive extremist elements out of Pakistan. And the reason Gen. Mushy does not want to drive extremist elements out of Pakistan is because that would not win him lots of popularity votes.

Yes DesiDude, there is an important political message in the cartoon, but it could have been conveyed without drawing a toilet paper turban on Bin Laden. Draw him like a rat if you want, but to draw the turban like Huffaker does is derogatory and insulting to other turban wearers, as Amardeep says in comment #21.

While I disagree with most everything Vikram has to say, I have to agree that the use of "house negro" and the like is distasteful at best. I also don't think we have any call to be using that particular phrase anyway--it's a legacy of plantation divide-and-conquer. I've heard plenty of black people say they're wary using it. I dont' see why we should. The vilest arguments, if made on their face, deserve counter easy counter arguments, not ad hominem attacks.

It actually took me a while to figure out what was the problem until Amardeep posted his letter--I actually didn't see the toilet paper in the cartoon. It's not my favorite style of cartoon, I find it visually confusing.

That caricature was insulting to all blacks. Toilet paper on Osama's head is insulting to him,

I can see where this argument is coming from, which makes it all the more necessary for our counter arguments to be precise and careful. I think Amardeep's tack is exactly right: in my experience fiery, offended outrage does not make people feel bad and think about changing nearly as much as persistent, careful explaining. And I think this cartoonist is someone who might be able to see our point of view, and change their minds*, so it's worth a try.

Racists have developed idiosyncratic buckets of tricks and insults, one bucket per perceived group. American racists have their own buckets for their own groups; I'm sure we could find similar buckets in other countries.
Now, even when describing someone despicable, using an insult from such a bucket gives that insult credibility and heft, and implies that part of the disgusting thing about the despicable person is their ethnicity/whatever. Therefore it spreads the insult out to all the innocent members of that group, unfairly associating them with the despicable person and also putting more sting in an insult that they are undoubtedly going to face again. Therefore personalized insults are both more effective and risk less collateral damage--they're less generally offensive, and more specifically and desirably offensive against the true target of insult. And they're a lot harder to make-- a true challenge for the crafty artist.

It's possible that a some American, say, without too many friends from a given other minority group might not be aware of the contents of the bucket corresponding to that group. I think sometimes many of you are too quick not to give people credit or put yourselves in other people's shoes. The fact is OBL's turban is somewhat distinctive,and it's very white, and it's clearly made from a softer, fluffier fabric. It lacks that hardcore taut and starched look. It's possible, that Sandy was thinking that this is more of a personalized insult.

Here's a question for you: is it okay to insult OBL as a pansy-ass pretty boy coward who uses fabric softener on his turban, or is that too insulting to gentlmanly fops the world over?

But the answer is not trying to get in the good graces of the American elite.

Um, I hate to point out the obvious, but a lot of us are Americans. I'd really prefer we not get sacked any time soon, thank you very much. Luckily most of India is not dumb enough to take that advice and has no interest in stupidly attempting to sack us.

*Whew! What a concept! Try to talk to someone in a way that's designed to change their mind!

Hari Chandra...I see your point. Mirage fighters would be nice. And having the ability to defend oneself against an aggressor is, naturally, important. I just find that agressors are usually trumped up a bit by hawks in order to justify excessive military buildup.

Its not reasonable to expect that the U.S. media would treat South Asians with any level of respect, given the lack of general South Asian influence on the world. Influence in today's world, I think, is primarily economic, though partly military as well.

But I think it is reasonable to expect the media to treat South Asians (well, anyone frankly) with respect. I know that's not going to happen, but it doesn't mean I shouldn't expect it. If we lower our expectations, they won't fail to take advantage of it, and deliver even less. And I think south asian influence in the world, economically, culturally, (not so much militarily, I think) is quite lage, and growing rapidly...so much so that Americans have noticed (we're not the only ones making jokes about Indian ingenuity re: outsourcing) and I think growing awareness has brought a certain uneasiness along with reluctant respect.

Saheli:

Admittedly, a sack of the United States would be an exceptional logistical nightmare. The colonization of the United Kingdom, maybe. Perhaps a coup d'etat in Washington - a RAW sponsored reinstatement of Bill Clinton as premier.

I wasn't being literal then and I'm not being literal now.

Cicatrix:

I see your point about expectations and your point about hawks using imaginary aggressors to unnecessarily justify military buildup (see: George Fernandes). The United States is beginning to notice South Asia in a way that it hasn;t since the gloray days of Nehru. Its good.

Thanks for highlighting the toilet paper. I hadn't noticed it and thought you guys were referring to it out of the blue !

Glory days of Nehru? Sorry when was this?

For decades the US has hated us for being pally pally with the Soviets. You want them to 'take notice' of India like that again? Er...

MD take a look around the site this cartoon is on, it's on I look at regularly as I'm a big fan - they can be immensely insightful and also very touching (see the Tsunami section). Hell I've even had a ham-fisted attempt at drawing Osama myself.

Just goes to show that talentless hacks who can draw a little can pass garbage as "cartoons" and file it under the category of humor. In all due honesty, this cartoon in itself doesn't phase me. What irks me is the context, quality, and medium it was displayed in. That cartoon really isn't funny, not because of the TP turban, but in general. Someone with a creative sense of humor could actually present something different, fresh, and funny, even if it is slightly offensive. It's all about the context of the presentation.

Newspapers, news websites, and professional editorial columns should apply more discretion to what is put out (um, quality?). There is a time and place for humor of this sorts, and the context in which it's convyed wouldn't be all that offensive. Stand up comics, writers, and humor websites take liberty in poking fun while getting some laughs.

It's the type of humor that isn't necessarily for everyone, but you can access such humor at your own will without having it passed on to you with a saccharine saturated coating, which is what 'political' cartoons in the more established media do.

If anyone has seen the movie 25th Hour with Ed Norton Jr., he goes into a rant literally tearing up every minority, majority, rich, poor, powerful, loved ones, etc. The rant, if read by itself or piecemeal is quite offensive. But taken into the context of the movie, it makes sense.

Political cartoonists as a group just aren't talented enough to expose and utilize more subtle, yet tremendously funny sources of humor. Instead of trying to cater to what the audience really wants, why not do something original and push something new, fresh, and creative? The standard replies are,"But, oh, they [the audience] just won't get it!". Well buddy, that simply means you really don't have much talent to create something; You just regurgitate pre-processed, high sodium, high fat, high calorie, mixed horsemeat crap.

What is really surprising is that this kind of insensitivity is usually prominent among the right/conservative folks(who coined 911 changed everything) - Sandy seems to be from the liberal left who dislikes the Republican/Bush administration. From someone from that category to draw a turban with a toilet paper is rare. If anytthing, they are over-sensitive to terroristy types.

M. Nam

This is infact a pro-liberal Democrat-leaning political cartoon.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making.

Manish, that line was meant for the guy who brought out the whole liberal vs. conservative circle-jerking tangent to the conversation.

But a toilet roll is not the same as a towel. Plus, there is no precedent of toilet-roll-head used as a derogatory term.

...like calling someone a coon and then protesting you're referring to their resemblance to wildlife:

Putting a simple turban on his head would have sufficed. But then again, this is not any Middle-Eastern person shown here. This is not just any old 'someone'. It very specifically refers to OBL not to an Arab/Asian stereotype. The interpretation of the toilet-roll in this cartoon IMO should be 'OBL is a toilet-paper-head', not 'Middle-Eastern folk'.

I am familiar with the 'towelie' slur. I would be very outraged if they showed any unmarked Middle-Eastern/SE Asian person with a toilet-paper in place of the turban.

Yes, as I said in comment #30, it's an easy, needless, tasteless shortcut.

What exactly does this mean? Since you're definitely-not-a-bleeding-heart, I don't quite understand why you're so touchy....

I was trying to give pointers to Vikram on how to be a hit on this blog. I was being sarcastic...

The formatting on the last post was screwed up. Apologies.

// begin Not in blockquote

Putting a simple turban on his head would have sufficed. But then again, this is not any Middle-Eastern person shown here. This is not just any old 'someone'. It very specifically refers to OBL not to an Arab/Asian stereotype. The interpretation of the toilet-roll in this cartoon IMO should be 'OBL is a toilet-paper-head', not 'Middle-Eastern folk'.

//end not in blockquote

this is a site for "2nd generation dudes only - preferably liberal

I disagree with the 2 nd generation part but you definitely have to be liberal and the way these guys define it.

I found out about Sepia Mutiny via BlogHer and it was presented as the exact opposite of an echo chamber; I'm inclined to agree. After wading through the site, I do not see a bias towards liberals and as I understand it, the site is BY or FROM 2nd generation Indians FOR everyone (not just dudes). Or so we were told.

Complaining that an opinion held by what you perceive as the minority isn't welcome is a fine way to distract and avoid the hard work that is crafting a solid argument. I think we all know that it's easier to whine.

Oh, and the cartoon is problematic, if only because people who wear turbans have to deal with enough ignorance and stupidity, they don't need more.

Thanks for this site.

DNBH.. ah, I see. That fabled conservative humor. It appears so rarely, I'm sorry to have missed it.

Perhaps we need to have standards for depictions of Osama.

Osama should always be depicted nobly, preferably riding a horse with laughing children trailing him. Or with a sword attacking an Apache helicopter. Osama can also be shown in the laboratory developing new methods for milk production to feed laughing children. Also, please use Mr. bin Laden's left side as he thinks that is his best side. Do not show his nose hairs either as he is very sensitive about that. Also his eyes are rainforest dew, not brown. Please take my advice. Rainforest dew.

Irene, as someone here said about somebody else, you missed the point by about a hundred miles.

ObL is depicted very well in this picture. The cartoonist was so busy slamming Bushy and Mushy, he didn't, apparently, give much thought to ObL, and seemed to think that swaddling his head in TP would do the trick...even things out..be fair & balanced.

The point is that this is predicated upon the assumption that the turban can be seen as a symbol for all that is evil about ObL. This, obviously, places every turban-wearing man alive in one hell of a ridiculous spot.

No one is saying that bin Laden deserves a better depiction. Turban-wearers do.

Who removed my post?

And am I not deserving of a reason why?

cicatrix and bong breaker (what is a bong breaker anyway? Does this question mark me out for the prudish ninny I am? Well, good. And cicatrix - I use that word all the time in my pathology reports. As in: Skin, site, procedure: 1. Cicatrix. 2. No residual dysplastic nevus seen (typical pathology report. Don't know why I felt the need to tell you that)

Ok, you guys know more about this stuff than I do, so I'll check out the cartooning site on your recommendations. Still, the blank space for your own cartoon is a good idea, innit?

The point is that this is predicated upon the assumption that the turban can be seen as a symbol for all that is evil about ObL. This, obviously, places every turban-wearing man alive in one hell of a ridiculous spot.

So the derelicts who would hate a man because of his headgear would be less inclined to do so if it was drawn as cloth and not toilet paper.

How about an Osama with no turban at all then?

A criminal could, hypothetically, take advantage of the behavioral changes being made required. Once upon a time, if a plain-clothed man with a gun runs at you, you err on the side of caution and run for cover in case the guy doesn't have a friendly face, and even if he is friendly, you'll demand identification and that procedures be followed in detail. Today, we have to err on the side of caution by assuming a security official will inspect us and let us go upon realization we're a good diaper-wearing individual, and we don't dream of questioning the motives or asking for their id.

The criminal-minded could take advantage of this and mug every scared sikh down to the last penny as a "security measure". Let's just hope the mafia don't wisen up to this untapped lucrative market of sikh-robbing. By the time a recently mugged and still screaming sikh finds someone blind enough to lend him a cell phone, the thief would be refueling his gas for the fifth time three states away.

MD, Badmash and The Boondocks are two of my favorites, although, strictly speaking they're more comic strips than political cartoons. Eh, whatever. And yes I chose the name for the many connotations, thanks for noticing.

Irene: I give up. You're either being deliberately obtuse or dumb as a rock.

what is a bong breaker anyway? Does this question mark me out for the prudish ninny I am? Well, good.

No idea what it means love.

the point is that the cartoonist, in depicting

osama wearing a toilet roll and paper, played into two linked stereotypes, both false and harmful -- indeed, deadly.

one, that turbans are akin to toilet paper,

two, that turbans are a marker of extremism and terrorism.

Deadly, Wow ! I have heard hyperventilating before but this takes the cake.

Most people can make a distinction between a cartoon and real life. I think the only thing the cartoonist was trying to do was be funny.

If you stretch this argument a little further alomost all art (Please note that I am not saying this is art) can be deadly. it will invariably offend someone. especially in this age were we are all taught that any hurt feeling is bad, actually deadly.

Also, I would welcome comments from people as to what the cartoonist could have done without the toilet paper or the turban and still be funny.

I am sure any depiction would have offended some other group. Or is it just Desis we are trying to protect ! If so, I withdraw.

DNBH, you conveniently ignored the fact that Siddhartha M also said this:

ridiculing turbans by associating them with defecation ... and, to add injury to insult, stigmatizing turban wearers as extremists, is ammunition for the idiots who beatdown or kill sikhs and other wearers of similar gear.

His argument was a fairly self-contained one, so I think 'stretching it a little further" is of really no consequence.

By the way, did you really find the toilet-paper-turban funny?

Complaining that an opinion held by what you perceive as the minority isn't welcome is a fine way to distract and avoid the hard work that is crafting a solid argument. I think we all know that it's easier to whine.

Jennifer,
I don't have a problem with the hard work. Ok I will say it - SM kudos on the hard work.

Now calling me a whiner is an equally easy way to avoid actually refuting the argument. Now please take a few seconds and point out the people who have disagreed with the fact that we need not use words like deadly to describe a cartoon.

OK . take a few days and show me some examples where people have actually sided with the conservative view point.

I feel justified in calling this a liberal hang out.

ABCD bachcha log getting their knickers in a twist over a cartoon. lage raho !

His argument was a fairly self-contained one, so I think 'stretching it a little further" is of really no consequence

Oh, It is. Implicit in my argument is the fact that we do not stop producing cartoons because of the hadnful of idiots. So do we stop criticizing this administartion because there is a nut case somewhere who would take what we said and try to harm someone in the adminstration. Common, you know better than that !

Whether, I find it funny is beside the point. to be honest, I think it is silly but definitely not deadly as you seem to think.

dnbh,

if you found my argument challenging, I'm sorry. but let me answer your question:

Also, I would welcome comments from people as to what the cartoonist could have done without the toilet paper or the turban and still be funny.

answer: lose the toilet paper.

pet it now?

peace

oops -- that should be:

get it now?

peace

Who removed my post?

And am I not deserving of a reason why?

do you mean this one? you posted it on the wrong thread.

try as you might, you're not being persecuted by sepia's management.

peace

For those of you whose brains are exploding because of thinking too much here at Sepia Mutiny, head over to http://www.dippu.com and look at pictures of my new niece. That should make everybody happy. :)

That's shameless self-publicity there daycruz. But I visited. You know that pic of a bunch of kids a little way down? I can always tell the difference between British Asians and American/Canadian Asians. It's like some weird fifth sense.

in my opinion this isn't a debate about the merits of caricatures, or the general level of racism in society. its about, for brown people, maybe shit is about to hit the fan. make all the lame points you want, but tell me you'd have chosen to be japanese in the 40's. if not, then you might understand, us browns are trying to figure out if we're about to land in a pretty bad spot. if you're not down with wondering about that, get out of the way. cos this is know pretty serious business for us.

"Most people aren't so hypersensitive"

are you serious? we're not supposed to be acknowledging the fact people are considering some pretty bad ideas about what to do with us brown men? you're taking de-racination to an all time low here.

have you ever seen a political cartoon from the 30's? sometimes political cartoons or pictures might be like canaries in a mine shaft, just my opinion

us browns are trying to figure out if we're about to land in a pretty bad spot. if you're not down with wondering about that, get out of the way. cos this is know pretty serious business for us.

Might I suggest a tinfoil hat or expedia.com?

Expedia.com? Are you suggesting I should leave the country if I feel threatened? Pathetic.

"Might I suggest a tinfoil hat or expedia.com?"

I doubt you expect this is an appropriate response, and if you do, what are you doing on a site for south asian people?

Can we stop responding to people who can't see the obvious ignorance and racial stereotpying in a cartoon depicting a toilet paper roll coming off a turban for a moment and have a serious conversation among those of us who are capable of such things?

Here's a topic: Why do we SM posters and readers have so much more discussion and action about cartoons, radio stations, and other examples of things which will allegedly lead to bad things, but many fewer about actual bad things like this this possible hate murder and subsequent botched NYPD investigation of a brown person in May (apologies if this was covered and I missed it, but I didn't see it deemed postworthy) or this recent news that immigrants entering from 32 Muslim countries, Thailand, and the Phillippines are being profiled and subjected to extra investigation. Which particulary immigrants--I don't know--because it's being done by order of a "secret memo" that we're not supposed to know about for some reason. So much for democracy.

From the Guardian - Rabinder Singh QC - one of Britain's top young lawyers - he works with Cherie Blair wife of our Tony

An open letter to the person I sat opposite on the train yesterday.

Yesterday I sat on my commuter train and you were already sitting there in the seat opposite. Your eyes were closed. You must have been tired. Then you opened your eyes and you saw me. You got up and moved to the next carriage. Perhaps you wanted some privacy or did not want to disturb me with a mobile phone call. Or perhaps you were afraid of me ...

That would not surprise me. Some people say that the police should stop and search people who look "Asian" or "Muslim" at underground stations. In fact I am not a Muslim, I am a Sikh, but it does not matter - I still look suspicious to some. They say that only young men are like the suspects, but I have heard of women being stopped.

I share your fears. I do not want to die a horrible death any more than you do. I have a family to look after - perhaps you do too. You know so little about me - I wish we could have chatted and perhaps we might have realised what we have in common. All I ask is that you do not prejudge me. That is what "prejudice" means: to prejudge someone simply because of what they look like.

What can I say? On the television everyone is talking about what it means to be "British" and the end of multiculturalism. You may not think I look British but I feel British - I am a British Asian, or British Sikh if you like. If I go to India they know I am not one of them - they can see me coming a mile off. I like Indian food but so, I think, do you. And I also like Italian food, and Chinese, and bagels ...

I don't particularly like Bollywood, but apparently enough people in the area where I live do like it because they show Hindi films at the local cinema. By the way, in case you were wondering, it is not in Southall - in fact most of our neighbours are white, although one is from Norway and another American. I don't think people ask them: "What are you doing here? Are you British?"

I do not go to the gurdwara very often but I do believe in God and I am proud of my heritage - I respect my parents and the tradition they came from. I do not think God would want us to hate each other because of the way we look. And I certainly cannot accept that God wants us to kill innocent people.

But we have to care about innocent people everywhere - in Iraq and Chechnya as well as in New York and Madrid and London. I am not a pacifist, but I do believe in the principle of nonviolence. Only in the last resort could it ever be justified to use violence, when there is no other way open to defend ourselves or to protect others. You may have heard of Mahatma Gandhi. He was not British. In fact he used the principle of nonviolence to help push the British out of India. I think he was an inspiration to everyone; I think you might agree.

I am a lawyer, by the way. What do you do? In my work I sometimes represent the government. Not just the present government; I used to represent the last Conservative government in court too. But I also sometimes defend the rights of individuals who are pretty unpopular. That's my job. They may be asylum claimants or gay people. They may even be suspected of terrorism. I don't think suspending the Human Rights Act is the answer to the terrorist threat. The act is not part of the problem. It is part of the answer. It represents what we stand for - democracy and the rule of law.

Some people say we should not let the terrorists win; we should carry on as normal. But they seem to be the first people to say that we should get rid of these laws that "get in the way". In the way of what? Do we want people locked up in prison for years without ever being charged, let alone convicted? If it happened somewhere else, I think you might write a letter for Amnesty International demanding their release. But it happened here - until the law lords said it was incompatible with human rights.

These are not some foreign laws. British lawyers helped to draft the European convention on human rights, which was "brought home" by the Human Rights Act. And it is based on British notions of fair play going back to Magna Carta. Yes, I do know about these things and I do care about them. Shakespeare, John Locke and Tom Paine. They have made me who I am. They were as British as I am.

Maybe I am not what you think I am. Remember, we are all individual human beings, with our hopes and dreams; we all have our faults but are basically good, I think, and try to do the right thing. It's what is inside us that really matters, not the colour of our skin or what we wear. I do not ask you to agree with me about everything. But I do ask: please do not prejudge me because of the way I look.

· Rabinder Singh QC is a barrister at Matrix Chambers and a visiting professor of law at the LSE

Manish:

The point is to improve the country we live in.

Was it at Berkeley that you picked up your sense of outrage & racial/ethnic identity politics?

Nicely done! I expect nothing less from someone who chooses curry as their moniker.

Deepa,

Raju was talking "race war". If you think that's what's going on, then you seriously need to don the tinfoil or get out.

Going so far from reality does nothing to fix real injustices.

Manish, Raj, cicatrix, siddartha m, saurav--

If you think depicting Osama with a toilet paper turban is wrong, what would you say of talk like this:

Brown man to white man:

F**k you s**t for brains!
1. My sister was born in this country and is more American than your mullet-wearing-Milwaukee’s-Best-swilling-franks-and-beans-eating-relatives.
2. Most of you f**kers couldn’t point out where Afghanistan is on a map let alone point out where most American states are located.

That non-sequitors are fun, but generally not useful?

I expect nothing less from someone who chooses curry as their moniker.

You assume quite a bit. You should avoid doing that.

Manish, you engage in the kind of ethnic navel gazing that would get a white person labeled "racist". Maybe I'm mistaken, but my guess is that you didn't have that ethnocentric POV when you were a twelve-year-old boy in that spelling bee, so I'm curious as to what happened between then and now. UCB has the reputation as a place where students indoctrinated in the notion that everything bad in the world is caused by the white man, etc.

If you aren't comfortable with my terminology, feel free to say that you became "aware" at Berkeley. I just want to know if that's where it happened. If not Berkeley, please tell me when, where, and why. Traumatic experience at the hands of skinheads in high school? I really want to know.

"Raju was talking "race war". If you think that's what's going on, then you seriously need to don the tinfoil or get out."

Irene, I don't agree that's what Raju was saying. I think he was saying that we (desis) could be about to become collateral targets of the War on Terrorism. I personally am freaked about the British "shoot-to-kill" order and the recommendation by the International Association of Chiefs of Police to shoot bomber suspects in the head. Aside from this extreme there may be a great increase in hate crime against us.
I personally was born and raised in the U.S. and it's ridiculous to tell me to leave the country if I am not willing to put up with racism against me. (As I recall, the comments thread on the July 4th post contained a whole long "love it or leave it" discussion to which I refer you.)

"curry,"

who the hell are you to walk into manish's house and insult him?

manish and the mutineers set up this site and paid the costs and launched the topic and gave you a space to express yourself. you owe them respect, or you should leave.

vikram, DNBH and others have expressed disagreement with the premise of manish's post without feeling the need to insult him.

if you can't rise to that basic level of respect and dignity, the rest of us can only conclude that you are either a fool or a troll.

peace

The point of the cartoon is not to show Arabs as toilet-roll wearers, the point is to show that GW is not really intersted in pushing Gen. Mushy to drive extremist elements out of Pakistan. And the reason Gen. Mushy does not want to drive extremist elements out of Pakistan is because that would not win him lots of popularity votes.

True. The toilet paper is an afterthought.

Basically the liberals are arguing that there is no need to include the toilet paper so its inclusion entails that it is a racial insult.

The conservatives are agruing that the cartoon isn't about the toilet paper or turbans, its about finding Osama so in that case who gives a shit.

For what its worth, I am pretty sure cartoonist has not 'racist intentions' at all.

But the turban is somewhat sacred to desis, it is part of the Sikh religion's Kahlsa Panth. Many Hindus and Muslims in Desiland also have a tradition of wearing turbans (hindus more so than muslims). Example: Gandhi once refused to remove his turban in a british court in South Africa.

So you can see how this cartoon can be interpreted as a racial insult.

Irene, thats not what I was talking about at all, and thats obvious

"Going so far from reality does nothing to fix real injustices"

here's the problem; you're defining reality for other people and telling them which injustices they should register

"Brown man to white man:"

let me know when a brown man can tell a white man to leave the country and then we'll talk

Deepa,

There may be a great increase in hate crime against us.

If it didn't happen after 9/11, it ain't going to happen anytime soon.

we (desis) could be about to become collateral targets of the War on Terrorism. I personally am freaked about the British "shoot-to-kill" order and the recommendation by the International Association of Chiefs of Police to shoot bomber suspects in the head

A light-skinned Brazilian left a house under suspicion, ignored police orders to stop, jumped a subway turnstile. Why does this fear apply to you only? How did this become a racial issue?

shit is about to hit the fan..us browns are trying to figure out if we're about to land in a pretty bad spot. if you're not down with wondering about that, get out of the way. cos this is know pretty serious business for us...considering some pretty bad ideas about what to do with us brown men

Deepa, tell me what is Raj talking about there? Is he talking about the Tube like you said? I mean get a grip, how many various brown people have taken the subways in NYC and London since then. Millions. This happened to one guy, who's really barely brown from the pics I've seen. Who are all these "men planning" bad things with brown folks? Have the pogroms started? Why should only brown men be concerned, and not society at-large?

This kind of exaggeration does no one any good. Manish's ideas of getting better tech to find bombs, not people is good. But the kind of stuff Raj is talking is pure nonsense.

I personally was born and raised in the U.S. and it's ridiculous to tell me to leave the country if I am not willing to put up with racism against me.

Me, too. Don't put up with it. Don't live your life in fear in some exaggerated hysteria either. Things have changed after 9/11, but as a brown person, I don't feel any different, as a minority, living under Clinton than Bush. Perhaps because I am fortunate enough to live in a red state.

let me know when a brown man can tell a white man to leave the country and then we'll talk

I've done it many a times.

Irene: comment #28.

Saurav, your comment about wasting time arguing about trivial matters is a really good one. But Sepia does bring up serious topics quite often, sometimes things like toilet-paper-turbans do need to be confronted, and this site would be a really grim place if it focused unrelentingly on violent hate crimes and deportations. At least, that's my two cents.

Punjabi Boy, thanks for posting Rabinder Singh's letter. Beautifully written, pointedly confronting fears and suspicions, emphasizing a shared culture and humanity...With my impatient and irritable nature, I reach immediately for outrage, so that letter was a great reminder of how powerful gentleness and simplicity can be.

UCB has the reputation as a place where students indoctrinated in the notion that everything bad in the world is caused by the white man, etc.

A reputation as based in idiotic conventional wisdom as anything else you've spouted. First of all, your sentence is missing a good verb. "Are"---is that the verb you're looking for? Maybe you should reconsider your grammatical training before you tar the University with the country's best English department. I'm sure that "reputation" explains the gathering of some of the world's best scholars of Scaninavian studies, German studies, Dutch Studies, Slavic Studies, Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Archeology, Italian Studies, French, and Spanish. Or the 50+ year tradition of reading Beowulf. Aloud. In Old English. Yes, it's because UC Berkeley hates the power of the White Man that it spearheads the UC management of two atomic weapons labs and hosts some of the best ROTC training on the west coast.

Mixing up town and gown, or free speech with indoctrination, is indicative of exactly the kind of murky, confused thinking that plagues these discussions. The difference between Berkeley and other schools is that it champions free speech and free expression (because the students demanded it) and attracts diversity. It merely allows and encourages to students to express and explore their own opinions, even if that sometimes results in the kinds of noisy situations that attract media circuses. Accusing the University of using indoctrination to create liberals is like accusing Icelanders of manufacturing lava because it happens seep up out of the earth there. It's everywhere. It's just usually not that free to escape.

I don't know what classes Manish took, but I do know he had a variety to choose from and I assure you nobody indoctrinated him in anything. He's perfectly capable of forming his own opinions. And before you tell me that Berkeley indoctrinates people against the white man, I'd like to see how many more classes you've taken in Classics, Latin, German Literature, Evangelical Christianity in America, Shakespeare, or 19th century European diplomacy there. Basing your thinking on mere Zeitgeist and anecdote is the sign of sheep-like thinking. Check your facts before you spout.

Saheli writes:

>>Berkeley...champions free speech and free expression...and attracts diversity.

Really?
M. Nam

All those who are calling Manish ethnocentric dont realize that how dangerous it is to spread "turban" sterotypes.

Some innocent Sikhs will pay the price with their life, as Balwinder Sing in Mesa,AZ did.

It is literally LIFE and DEATH issue.

perhaps because I'm fortunate enough to live in a red state

Mind if I finish that sentence?

"Perhaps because I'm fortunate enough to live in a red state and not Los Angeles, New York, Seattle, DC or any other primary terrorist target."

I don't feel any different, as a minority, living under Clinton than Bush

If you're trying to convince people to accept the "truth" of your opinion, you really shouldn't say things like this; that's a thirteen-year span in which quite a lot has changed, good and bad, for minorities. On the other hand, if you're trying to tell everyone you're out of touch with the reality than many minorities currently face then, well, keep going.

On another note, some person who didn't have a point asked Manish to reveal where he cut his liberal fangs and Saheli kindly responded. So, now that that's out of the way, how about all of you who don't get this conversation step out and tell everyone where you were "indoctrinated" and subsequently explain why everyone's "outrage" has got you frothing at the mouth?

sd,

some person who didn't have a point asked Manish to reveal where he cut his liberal fangs and Saheli kindly responded. So, now that that's out of the way

It won't be out of the way until Manish responds. While I appreciate the efforts of the outraged "siddhartha m" as well as the grammar-checker*, only Manish can answer for himself.

A question for you, "sd" (as well as anyone else with a conflicted relationship with the US), what other country would be more hospitable to you?

*Not that I mean "grammar-checker" in any derogatory sense. Companies like Microsoft pay good money for people with that kind of attention to detail.

... you engage in the kind of ethnic navel gazing... that ethnocentric POV...

You mean I'm a diaspora narcissist? See blog title.

... that would get a white person labeled "racist".

Heavy stuff-- back it up. Points for chutzpah, though, objecting to a post about prejudice.

UCB has the reputation as a place where students indoctrinated in the notion that everything bad in the world is caused by the white man...

Actually, not only is Cal the best electrical engineering school in the world, there's a direct line from classical liberalism and the Magna Carta to Mario Savio. Not to mention the most famous college football play ever ;) But the application cycle for '06 is just beginning, so better luck tomorrow!

... please tell me when, where, and why...

Much as I'd love to compare inkblots and childhoods, do suffer me this question, 'Curry': do you post on African-American Web sites as 'Fried Chicken' or Asian-American ones as 'Chop Suey?' Please tell me when, where and why.

Irene, if you're brown I think you're living in denail. And if you're not I don't think you should be so sure there is no change in our situation recently. editorials, some of which get quite a bit of support from readers, have been saying its ok to generalize brown men and pick them out. thats not in itself a really bad thing, but things have changed, and could change more, for the worse. to me that just seems like a fact of life. things are different. they could get worse. we should talk about it. there's not much use for people to deny it, or if they do, why keep pestering other people to deny it.

if you want to deny it, go ahead, but why the need to stop other people from confronting a problem that reasonably exists.

Manish,

Much as I'd love to compare inkblots and childhoods, do suffer me this question, 'Curry': do you post on African-American Web sites as 'Fried Chicken' or Asian-American ones as 'Chop Suey?' Please tell me when, where and why.

No, but I do post as Curry on other fora. Why do you ask? Oh that's right, you need to feed your sense of outrage as an oppressed minority, so you'll see an offense where none exists.

The term "Diaspora narcissist" is apt. Thank you for that.

It's interesting that you linked to a Victor Davis Hanson piece on classic liberalism. He sees the difference between it and doctrinaire liberalism. Do you?

Heavy stuff-- back it up.

MoorNam's link to UCB's idea of "diversity" sums it up well.

ABCD bachcha log getting their knickers in a twist over a cartoon. lage raho !

Andha ban ke kaise sikhao?
Adhyapak ban ke daru pilao.

(How can you teach, once you're blind?
Call yourself a teacher, feed 'em bad wine.)

... I do post as Curry on other fora... Oh that's right, you need to feed your sense of outrage as an oppressed minority...

Ah, curry the tartan. Of course, why didn't I think of that? Say, do you post as 'Spic' on Latino sites because of your love of cleaning products? ;)

It's interesting that you linked to a Victor Davis Hanson piece... He sees the difference between it and doctrinaire liberalism. Do you?

Think hard about this one. Person you revile links to an author you like. How is this possible? Why, it violates the first law of tin-foil-hatitude!

MoorNam's link to UCB's idea of "diversity" sums it up well.

No, no, let's not change the subject, let's respect your original point. You implied the things I've written are racist. Show me.

this site would be a really grim place if it focused unrelentingly on violent hate crimes and deportations. At least, that's my two cents.

cicatrix, thanks for acknowledging my existence :) Just wanted to be annoying and point out that the threads like this (now at 126 comments and counting) devolve quickly into personal conflicts and random arguments.

I think that's because this kind of topic sets up nicely into a false dichotomy between "liberals" and "conservatives" (or "left" and "right") (or FOBs and ABCDs) and let's us pretend we're talking about politics and power and something deeply meaningful when, imo, we're really primarily talking about our sensibilities being offended and then coming up with somewhat tenuous links to real world events like Balbir Singh's murder.

We can talk about the links to a broader cultural trend that creates a climate for abuses, but I don't think it's fair to ask people like me who don't put as much stock in its relative importance (as opposed to, say, the ties between wealth and access to adequate mental health resources, sexual repression, public education's evident failure to address these issues, or other things that might be to blame) to assume the link or the idea that it can somehow be separated from a broader analysis.

I think (correct me if I'm wrong, Manish), I've previously heard Manish express the opinion that if it's well done it's okay--well, why? And if that's the case, is the real beef against incompetence or people who are not quite so witty (and the people who consume their work) rather than some kind of violation of political ethics?

It also raises questions about different forms of discourse--there are many things that are offensive in stand-up comedy, cartooning, and satire in general that would be unacceptable in other settings. If those outlets were eliminated from popular culture (or were refocused to attack, say, ugly people, who have no lobby, rather than racial identity groups), then what would the angry or ignorant or mischievious people who partake in them do? Or is it really the case, as a lot of people are contending, that there's a link to a broader culutural trend and that the toilet paper roll is not just obscene (although perhaps less so than an oil-baron / petty dictator conspiracy to keep us all in fear, if said idea is real ;) but actually socially destructive.

Either way, I sure as hell am not going to roll over and say "woe is me" without at least putting out all these other aspects of it and making sure that people who are articulate and thoughtful have the right and space to express their opinions here without being shouted down.

I know that the many people on this blog are capable of that kind of thing--I've seen other discussions on this blog that were less rooted in theory and more rooted in people's personal experiences (restaurant bias, what they were called as kids, etc.)

Your point about morbid and/or serious topics being not so much fun to dwell on all the time is a good one (and something I hear more frequently than I'd like and hence have to work on), but there are ways to have light fare without framing it in a social justice context. I liked talking about good places to eat and childhood reading habits.

what other country would be more hospitable to you

Well, I won't respond to that question until you respond to mine: Why does the conversation/criticism here bother you so much?

I wanna retract my statement I made on this post. I have been busy and I just checked this and WHOA!!!I should have been more lucid I suppose.

I was only trying to say conservative or/and FOB opinions will have to be backed by very good arguments bcos u have a bunch very smart and articulate liberal 2nd generation people on this blog, who will tear u apart otherwise.

If I felt this was not a inclusive place I wouldnt be here.

True, viewpoints here lean more oneway, but everyone has their say. And ofcourse a comment made by one moderator does not indicate the views of all. Having said this, I also think there is room for improvement to accomodate alternative opinions in the comments section.

Manish, I don't revile you, and I never accused you of being a racist. I accused you of ethnic navel gazing that would get a white person labeled "racist". A white person who maintained a website detailing white accomplishments, as well as outrages (real or otherwise) committed against whites would be suspicious, you see.

I've suggested that you picked up this POV in Berkeley, but I acknowledged it could be elsewhere. UCB is a fine school if you're getting a degree in the hard sciences, not so great if you're getting it in something soft like Journalism or Wimmin's Studies. I'll even admit that counterculture can bring refreshing changes to staid industries. But revolutions mature and become ossified, and outlive the original purpose. The kind of "People Power" I see in Berkeley today doesn't liberate anyone; it just creates animosity and division.

So if not Berkeley, where? Did you go to high school in a bastion of racist rednecks like the Idaho panhandle? Or maybe you faced discrimination on the job post-college?

Saurav, you've brought up so many great points, as always, that I can't respond to everything without creating yet another dialogue on this thread. ;)

But let me run through some. I get that you think this is a pointless post resulting in a petty squabble. You may be right, but why be riled up about it? Just move on to a more serious post, yeah? Too many people getting bothered here as it is.

I share the opinion that if it's well done, it's ok..or least, ok enough for me to launch a counter-attack :) But again, if it annoys you, just ignore it. This site can't humor everyone, and some of us do like the more ridiculous items too.

yes, there have been some trolls running amock here...but I'm guilty of joyfully leaping into the gutter with them, hurling my best insults ;)

About different forms of discourse...I don't mean to buttress a point with an personal anecdote, since I think you prefer theory, but it's a powerful one to me. When I first came to the states, Andrew Dice Clay's (I know, he's the joke now..but back then) jokes about "shit-colored" people were hugely popular.

I think there's a difference between humor and mean-spiritedness..I don't want to wave a PC wand over anything, but who here, even among these rabid defenders of some sort of conservatism (I can't tell which since all they want to do is make fun of UCB and insinuate that the rest of us are Osama-lovers) find this toilet paper thing funny??! If it had me rolling on the floor, I wouldn't say a word, no matter how tasteless it might have been. But I think the only people who would guffaw are the kind who blur terrorist/brown/turban all into vestigal fears of minorities getting uppity... Just like those people who were helpless with laughter, cause, you know "shit-colored' is such a HILARIOUS discription!!! what a hoot!!! People adopt such prejudices unthinkingly after a while, because, you know, it's just a joke, and next thing you know it's perfectly ok for the children of reasonable parents to come up to me and tell me I "literally look like shit" and run away, slapping each other on the back with laughter. It's petty and stupid, sure...but it's not funny.

Er, I think you brought up other things that ought to be addressed, but this is way too long already :)

So, if not Berkeley, where?

Omigod, why does it matter? You've wasted 3+ posts trying to nail an answer, give it up, make a point, do something...

"Curry" - what the hell does his college, hometown or on the job experiences have to do with anything? Do you have a point? Are you implying something that the rest of us are too dim to get? Why don't you do us all a favor and spit it out before you either choke, or bore us to death?

"sd",

Why does the conversation/criticism here bother you so much?

Bother? Like Earth in H2G2, this blog is mostly harmless. It's no bother.

"whoa, tiger",

You've wasted 3+ posts trying to nail an answer, give it up, make a point, do something...

What can I say, I have patience...

"cicatrix",

what the hell does his college, hometown or on the job experiences have to do with anything? Do you have a point? Are you implying something that the rest of us are too dim to get? Why don't you do us all a favor and spit it out before you either choke, or bore us to death?

I am interested in Manish's formative years, especially as they relate to his current worldview.

Ah, well then...since you're so very personally interested in Manish, why don't you email him directly, and spare the rest of us? Unlike you, he's got the guts to place his email right there.

I get that you think this is a pointless post resulting in a petty squabble. You may be right, but why be riled up about it? Just move on to a more serious post, yeah? Too many people getting bothered here as it is.

Because I want to squabbble too :) I wish the people who actually opposed what Manish is saying in the post (which I do on some grounds--like the overemphasis on identity politics and total lack of class analysis and hyperbolic historical analogy) would do a better job of articulating what they're saying.

I talk in theory, but I actually prefer personal experiences about things like this because it gives some substance to the conversation. And it's interesting to me--I could care less what someone's uninformed theories are about something unless they happen to be particularly brilliant or well-informed about it, but their life experiences give you something to talk about and generate new ideas.

For example, I felt like, on a personal level, I encountered more hostility or slurring after the war in Iraq started than after the 2001 attacks and the tone of the country shifted; I'm not sure if that's just my perception or chance, or something else entirely, but that is the way it felt to me. If I'm right, I would be more concerned about militarism than about moronic depictions (although the two tend to go hand in hand).

Similarly, I know from people I've met that there's a big difference in what you encounter living in gentrified Brooklyn and being a professional and a citizen than what you encounter living in working class Brooklyn.

But I'll go to another thread and leave you all in...strife, I guess :)

This site can't humor everyone.

Oh...you've missed a central point of my personality. I'm a diva, baby.

Because I want to squabbble too :)

Ah!

*eyes light up*

then stick around now, baby!

(actually, not right now. It's bloody late, and I'm still working. argh. I live in Bk too. we should chat.)

Anyway, you just articulated a magnificent critique of the post. In 14 words, no less. Why not expand it and give me something to really sink my teeth into? (or send me whimpering into a corner)

Interesting about rise in hostility after the WoT got to Iraq. If I were to venture a hypothesis, I would say that your average insular American felt, understably, shock and sadness and unfocused anxiety after 9/11, but not seething, boiling anger, since there wasn't a object/person who could draw that kind of ire, you know?

Even after Osama was, er, fingered, it was too confusing, what with the Taliban, and Osama being Saudi, and all this new Middle East stuff to learn. But Iraq brought clarity! Saddam! We've heard of HIM before! All that emotion and fear gets channeled to anger, and you got caught in the (undertow? riptide? wake? insert appropriate oceanographic/sailing metaphor). Since some gigantic chunk of the electorate thought Saddam was responsible for 9/11, I think this theory might be sound.

But, of course, this is still the worst sort of wild speculation. If you think militarism is a more effective trigger, write away ;)

I am interested in Manish's formative years

Does anyone else find this guy slightly sinister?

OMG, that guy is here too! I cannot go through another 8 months of being asked where I lived earlier. And no, for the last time it wasn't any place that I picked up my dislike for gardening!

It was midnight, when his mother woke up screaming. She woke up to see her sweet son's face looming over her. Shaking from fear, she asked: "Curry beta! what are you doing?"

Curry said, with his trademark beatific smile: "I just wanted to see where I came from Ma!"

Manish,

What's the wierd/insecure thing with curry's nickname, besides the fact that some food-ignorant people label all South Asian foods as curries (see previous SM post -- good post, btw).

Maybe curry's brown and he/she is just making a funny like Turbanhead, or a big fan of curry, or their name is actually Curry (it's a common name), or they're part of the clan currie, or they're spouse is or whatever. Calling a person a racist is pretty bad, isn't there another conceivable explanation?

Do you really see racism in everything as small as a poster's nickname which many people only give a 1-2 second thought to?

... overemphasis on identity politics and total lack of class analysis and hyperbolic historical analogy...

The post is 67 words long, excluding quotes. You might as well write a dissertation about the talk on a cereal box.

What's the wierd/insecure thing with curry's nickname...

You really should click through on the links in the comments. Most deleted comment spam here about 'all you Arabs must die' uses some variant of 'curry' as the nickname, because, for the third time, they're a common slur against desis.

Do you really see racism in everything as small as a poster's nickname...

You mean an ethnic slur on an ethnic site in a comment implying we're racist? It is, of course, possible that the intent here is not to slur, in which case it's an unfortunate, tin-eared nickname given the commenter's subject matter :)

"Have the pogroms started? Why should only brown men be concerned, and not society at-large?"

what are you waiting for?

second, it'd be great if people besides brown men are concerned. it'd be lovely.

I think there is a transition, at least in my thought, from someone who saw social justice as an issue that would be good to have, to someone who sees that if things are unjust in certain ways, I'm about to lose out. there is a difference. as a middle class north indian man, I have more to worry about all that much regarding my personal relationship with injustice now. its an mind-altering difference

Manish, are you interested in a wager? Nothing that involves money, just your pride. If I can prove that my real name is Curry, I want you to remove this page, as you aren't worthy to be considered an authority on the subject. No fair moving the content to some other location! If I lose, I'll not bother you again; I won't try to contact you again in this forum or through any other means. I'll let the Sepia Mutiny regulars (excluding you) judge who won. Deal?

If I can prove that my real name is Curry...

If 'Curry' is your actual name, congratulations. You might consider a different nick when posting about racism on a desi forum.

Much as I'm flattered by your interest in my origin myth, there is none. In the future, try not to start a conversation with 'so, why are you a racist?'

A white person who maintained a website detailing white accomplishments, as well as outrages (real or otherwise) committed against whites would be suspicious, you see.

Conflating the ethnic media with white supremacists? SM, MTV Desi, A. magazine, Yolk, Jade, Ebony and Latina ain't exactly Stormfront.

And on that note, you've just conclusively proved troll.

I'll let the Sepia Mutiny regulars (excluding you) judge who won. Deal?

We already judged and you lost. We think you are a mutt-faced execrable-wretch and a prancing pompous popinjay.

So shove it in your earhole!

if we had no ethnic media I'd run around thinking I was Tom Cruise. and that would be bad. no one wants that

if we had no ethnic media I'd run around thinking I was Tom Cruise

Explain.

Tom Cruise as proto-type white man in movies. me as someone who enjoys seeing desi people in media at times

Manish, you're taking an unfair beating from someone else right now (who keeps impolitely asking the same legitimate question--how did your views on ethnicity/identity politics form--in ways that will never produce an answer from you because he's accusatory and rude). That said, I can't let this go:

The post is 67 words long, excluding quotes. You might as well write a dissertation about the talk on a cereal box.

I wasn't aware that someone had imposed a character limit on your posts. I also wasn't aware that we're supposed to disregard lengthy quotes used for illustrative purposes. In any case, if you can make the argument you did in less than 67 words, you can make the analysis I'm asking you to make in less than 67 words.

Here's your post:

1.presentation of inappropriate stereotype of Arabs today
2. attempted connection to stereotyping against Japanese during WWII (which implicitly invokes, to me, the internments)
3. attempted connection to moronic statement by public official reiterating that racism against Arabs exists
4. refutation of people who think that this isn't a big deal by arguing that the "joke" masks a deeper sentiment that links other groups.
5. attempted connection to hate murder

Here's an alternative post that would address someo of what I'm talking about:

1. presentation of inappropriate stereotype of Arabs today
2. attempted connection of stereotype to broader cultural trends and government policies (i've seen fact sheets that draw out this connection)
3. attempted connection to government actions and the statements of other powerful individuals/orgs (e.g. post 2001 profiling, War in Iraq, etc.)
4. illustration of the income levels and/or professions (or some other indiciator of class) of hate crime victims, deportees, undocumented immigrants of all nationalities
5. attempted connection of said policies and statements to other policies and statements that target other communities--War on Drugs, larger trend of deporting immigrants, etc. (if you want to include history, the Palmer Raids are a better example for you than the internments)

You could even still have pictures!

Come on--if you want to make an argument that you don't think that the analsis you prestend carries more weight than what I'm arguing, then feel free to do so. The way I descriebd the alternative might be somewhat boring, but that's my limitation--the underlying ideas are just as ready to be illustarted graphically or through quotes (although perhaps would take slightly more digging). But don't pretend that the format is what excludes you from doing so. You relied on a series of entertaining anecdotes and images linked with one-liners--you could shift the analysis without changing that.

if we had no ethnic media I'd run around thinking I was Tom Cruise. and that would be bad. no one wants that

Raju, I mean this in all seriousness and without any sarcasm or snark--the way you put things sometimes is hilarious! I had absolutely no idea what you were talking about when you said this, but I thoroughly enjoyed the idea that, if deprived of SM and Bangla Patrika (or whatever you read), you would be walking around preaching about scientology and professing your love for Katie Holmes (and possibly trying to deal on your own with mental health issues and maybe even queerness!)

Why not expand it and give me something to really sink my teeth into? (or send me whimpering into a corner)

I think I sort of did that above in my response to Manish, and maybe in other places on this thread, but basically, I think this is a post targeted at peope who are going to be receptive to stereotypes, invokes the link to the japanese internments that I can't seem to get away from and is highly overexaggerated giving current circumstances, draws no links to policies affecting other communities (like the War on drugs), makes no distinction between how the policies affecting "our communities" impact people differently at different levels, citizenship statuses, etc. (leading to hysteria about possible pogroms coming our way), and, in general, presents a political narrative that I find tenuous at best and distracting at worst.

As for the militarism thing--I think it's "normal" for people who feel violated to want to seek revenge, retribution and, most importantly, redress, and it's on those grounds that I can understand/comprehend the war in Afghanistan as both an emotional and policy response. However, the overall trend of targeting Muslims domestically while lying and pushing the war in Iraq internationally and god knows what else (perhaps underlying seething resentments coming out post 2001 + the added backdrop that White working class people have been more politically disenfranchised over the past 15 years than they have in a while--in the sense that their bread and butter issues are not getting met + the generalized xenophobia, racism, etc. that comes out of that + the culture of militarism that exists in the U.S. + the systematic rooting out over 50 years of anyone who's a leftist, socialist, pacifist, etc. from American politics through a variety of tactics from immigration policies to the McCarthy hearings to cointelpro + the problem of state funding and control of education in states where they simply do a horrible job of it...)

asking me to flesh something out is genearlly not a good idea :)

Here's an alternative post that would address someo of what I'm talking about...

You're right, that would be a different post. That's why you have a blog, no? Mine is a response to a caricature in the form of a caricature.

... you can make the analysis I'm asking you to make in less than 67 words.

I'd love to see you make a point in less than 67 words ;) (I kid, I kid...)

I'd love to see you make a point in less than 67 words ;) (I kid, I kid...)

Hey I didn't say I could do it. All I have is an undergraduate history degree--they only trained me to critique, not produce :)

You're right, that would be a different post. Mines is a response to a caricature in the form of... a caricature.

Okay, so first your argument was that the (self-imposed) word length prohibited you from doing it. Now your argument is that you were producing satire and therefore the analysis you presented is the one and only one that can be offered here and somehow beyond criticism that can be responded to. I'm not asking for a thesis here--just better politics behind your caricature. Or a defense as to why the message here is the appropriate one.

I'm sure you're well aware that 100 diffferent messages can be sent on any given issue through caricature with slight changes to wording or imagery--given that if you took the toilet paper roll out of the cartoon, we wouldn't probably wouldn't even be having this conversation and the focus of the cartoon would be entirely different.

Word count: 134; I hope this is acceptable ;)

Okay, so first your argument was that the (self-imposed) word length prohibited you from doing it.

I've made one argument: this is a post in a specific format. You would have made different artistic and political judgments, bully for you.

I'm not asking for a thesis here--just better politics behind your caricature. Or a defense as to why the message here is the appropriate one.

I didn't write an essay here and I am not going to write one now. If you boil down your objections to a few clear bullet points, I'd be happy to try and respond. I've looked at every comment of yours and it's still not clear where the dividing line is between 'this post's point is wrong' vs. 'it's ok, but I would have said something else.'

Hmmm, interesting comments.

So my observations as a conservative type who hangs out here:

-Generally, the majority of the opinions of the commenters skew to the left but there are a few fairly tough minded conservatives who stick it out and post regularly (I need all the help I can get and I'm so glad when GC is around to shore up my silly writings).

-The most intriguing are the "idiosyncrats", I call them. You can't tell which way they will go with an argument. I so want to be this person. A woman of mystery and all....

-It is not a rare thing (although, it is certainly not the rule) for a desi commenter to complain about bias and bigotry and then turn around and make a bigoted comment about another race, especially whites. Quelle suprise and sort of sad.

-The cartoon is deeply silly, don't like the toilet role and don't like the way Bush is portrayed either.

-I don't lose a lot of sleep over this kind of thing, but then, it's not my blog.

-I rarely agree with Manish on anything, and boy have we had some dust-ups in the comments section, but I believe he posts in good faith. This is what he thinks and he's telling you why. So, if I disagree, the onus is on me to try and show him the error of his ways :)

-Went out last night with a bunch of late-twenty somethings. Sweet kids, but how horrible it is to do things that are past your time, if you know what I mean. I just couldn't have been more horrified. Did I really used to enjoy going out to such places? The wierd thing is, a lot of the kids looked slightly sad in repose. And lots of pretty desi girls sitting by themselves. What is wrong with you boys? Ask them to dance, for heaven's sake. And if he asks you, don't be stuck up. It's just a dance, after all.

(Altough, if I were a guy, or a gay woman, I would be very happy with the amount of cleavage that seems to be on display these days. Hard to buy a 'blouse' that is fashionable and doesn't reveal yourself to the world. Still, I am so glad the 'blouse is back' although it makes me feel old since I remember the first time around, and isn't Prada and all this 'ethnicky' beady chic gorgeous, gorgeous, gorgeous? You guys need a dedicated fashion blogger around here: ANNA could do it. She's got that other fashion blog).

MD, can you explain more about the inter-change of someone saying something bigoted about white people after complaining about racism? Personally I don't believe white people in general need as much protection from racism as other people. because racism affects brown people in worse ways. Not to say its not sad for a brown person to be racist. I think its sad.

Raju, complaining about racism and then turning around and saying something racist yourself (about white people, black people, or about, ahem, other south asians of a different ethnic group) is hypocritical and mind-blowingly stupid. Saying that a particular group "doesn't need as much protection" assumes too much.

Saurav, uh, your militarism argument rather echoes what I said about moronic depictions in comment #133. The parenthetical bit in #154 basically elaborates upon what I meant by saying "vestigial fears of minorities getting uppity."

Dude, quite pouting cause we all don't think and write the way you think we should! Your quibbles about Manish's post are an attempt to create another, entirely different post - as he or someone else already said. (I'm getting dizzy scrolling up and down.) It's not your blog sweetheart. Pick your battles, eh?

Forgive me for three comments in a row:

I just like to give a shout out to all of Curry's former neighbours and archivists. Without you, we wouldn't know about the man he has become today. May God bless you all.

mutt-faced execrable-wretch and a prancing pompous popinjay

Cicatrix,

I can think of times when having racist views toward white people it really negatively hurts white people. And at all times I think its sad to harbor racist feelings toward any group.

But what I'm assuming is racism disproportionately hurts people of color. This question has vexed me in the past because I see it as harmful to providing solutions to racism.

I think the way our society looked would be totally different if anti-white racism was as big a problem in terms of making people's lives harder as ia anti-black racism or at other times anti-desi racism, or racism against other groups

sunday night greetings to all of your asses. (or monday morning for the uk massive.)

saurav, you know i'm feeling you, my calcutta marxist intellectual coffee drinking class conscious thoughtful brother, but i do not get what you're trying to do with manish's post. first, i see nothing wrong with the original post. the brother is using poetic license, juxtaposing a series of images, other people's words, and his own words, to create an impact. what's wrong with that? let a hundred flowers bloom, yo.

cicatrix and raju, all i'd like to point out is that racial prejudice and racism are two slightly different (though overlapping) concepts. racial prejudice is unpleasant and lowers the dignity and humanity of the prejudiced person. i think this is what cicatrix is pointing out. but racism is a system of power -- and as such, it affects different groups differently. racism is a system with winners and losers. historically in the u.s. and elsewhere, white people have been the winners. that may well have frayed by now, or there may be numerous other subplots in operation, but that's still the framework of historical record. so i'd endorse what raju is saying, if we're talking power structure, and what cicatrix is saying, if we're talking individual humanity. no contradiction.

finally i want to give a big up to punjabi boy for his troll-dissolving techniques. like rubbing garlic on a vampire!

peace

siddhartha m, on the money.

it's still not clear where the dividing line is between 'this post's point is wrong' vs. 'it's ok, but I would have said something else.

i see nothing wrong with the original post. the brother is using poetic license, juxtaposing a series of images, other people's words, and his own words, to create an impact. what's wrong with that?

Okay, I'll stop with this one since I'm not making any sense to anyone except me.

There's nothing wrong with using a particular format to make an argument--I just think the message of the post is flawed in the context of this blog and what I assume its target demographics are. A constant stream of posts on cartoons, epithets on radio stations, and other things (of which this is an example) which imo overemphasizes the impact of surface level racism has relative to a lot of other things that are going on and says nothing about the underlying causes. It's like looking at six factors that produce something, ignoring five, and constantly harping on the other one all the time, all the while having less than minimal openness to talking about the other factors. I think the discussion in this article is relevant if you consider it in terms of "the South Asian community" rather than the subject of the article, which is "People of Color." Here's an excerpt:

It’s true that no set of categories or concepts is perfect, and it would be easy to come up with arguments against the set I’ve chosen. But starting with a concept like ‘People of Color’, which obscures privilege and hierarchy within the racial system itself, can often make work harder for antiracists.

And as a final point, just compare the treatment of this cartoon to that of the the one on the Dukes of Hazzard bit on the Daily Show (Confederate flag on a car).

off the topic thats off the topic, but i think people of color works sometimes and other times is obfuscating

just sayin

also Saurav, man I think you've talked yourself into a circle here. I like what you say a lot of the time so thats why I'm saying it

Md re going out,

you know now that I'm hooked up I go to a desi event to dance and have fun, and mad girls be looking at me. I even where my engagement ring, and it does not stop them. my impression; A) when you're not trying hard you're much sexier, and B) girls you need to stop waiting for mister stud or whatever you're doing, because I'm the same (sexy) guy I was before and you paid me no mind

i'm not mad about it though

cicatrix

Yeah sure they are all yours! But I was thinking that 'Pimply Pompous Popinjay' sounds much better dont you think?

Profile this

A former Australian soldier is suspected of being a masked gunman who appeared in a videotaped terror message this week threatening attacks against the West, newspapers have reported.

Mathew Stewart had served as a private with the U.N. peace keeping force in East Timor before he was discharged from the Australian army on psychiatric grounds in 2001 and apparently disappeared overseas.

Counterterrorism authorities launched an investigation Wednesday when a man wearing a balaclava and speaking in what experts agree is an Australian accent appeared on Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television in what purported to be an al-Qaeda video tape made in Afghanistan