are indians racists? – or is this asinine journalism?
With the controversies raging in Australia
over alleged racism by an Indian cricket player against an Australian,
there are many journalist who are making the most of the opportunity to
to further stoke up the issue – for motives selfish and / or not entirely honest.
Photograph: Sydney Morning Herald
This is one of them from the Guardian Unlimited
India in denial – Mike Marqusee
The response of the BCCI to the cricket row in Australia illustrates
the problem of entrenched racism in India – January 8, 2008 11:00 AM
Racism, towards people of African origin and and more broadly towards people with darker skins, is commonplace and vivid in south Asia, yet rarely acknowledged.
Visit Indian offices and factories, hotels, cricket grounds or airports, and the colour hierarchy leaps out at you. The higher up the managerial scale you go, the more likely you are to find lighter-skinned people. As a white-skinned visitor from the west, I can’t count how many times strangers have boasted to me with pride of their offspring’s fair complexion. Children with darker skins are often teased as “blackies”. Matrimonial adverts frequently emphasise fairness.
Skin lighteners are sold in vast quantities. Advertisements for “Fair and Lovely” skin whitener adorn cricket grounds and intrude endlessly on TV cricket coverage. In one of them, an earnest, dusky-coloured young female cricket fan is transformed by the application of skin lightener into a star cricket commentator.
I doubt if this author really comprehends what constitutes racism?
Yes there is colour hierarchy in Indian society, even to the point of discrimination
but that is not “racism”.
We Indians also believe anything made abroad is better, how does he define that?
The corollary to the authors logic,
Indians by nature bow to fair skinned people, so the Indian team acknowledge
the other 10 players in the Australian team are a “superior” race,
it is Symonds who is the only “inferior” individual.
That is ridiculous.
But as the laws of cricket now recognise, racist abuse is an offence of a special magnitude. If Harbhajan did call Symonds a “monkey“, then it was absolutely necessary for Australian captain Ricky Ponting to make a formal complaint, and for International Cricket Council (ICC) referee Mike Proctor to punish Harbhajan accordingly.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) statement on the Harbhajan ban read more like an emotional defence of Indian cricket and India as a whole than a considered response to the referee’s ruling.
There are abuses and swearwords and their are racial abuse.
Every time a person swears at another of a different race,
does that become a deliberate “racist” insult.
Had Harbhajan called Ponting a monkey, would that too be a racist jibe?
It is alleged that Hogg had called an Indian player a bastard – is that a racial insult?
Indians equate stupidity to asinine behaviour.
If an indian calls a white /black person a donkey
does that insult the intelligence of the other or his race?
The match referees has accepted the word of five “white” players
and ignored the evidence of two “coloured” players
with not a shred of corroborative evidence.
Is that a discrimination?
What an enquiry was to prove without doubt as
1. the alleged abuse had taken place
2. to racially insult was the deliberate intent.
I do not see that has been proved against Harbhajan Singh.
Colour hierarchy in south Asia is rooted in the history of caste and labour. (Incidentally, seven of the 11 who played for India at Sydney were of Brahmin background, though Brahmins make up only about 7% of the Indian population.) Colonialism, in which all Indians, however elite, found themselves on the wrong side of the colour bar, entrenched the value of whiteness and its associations with power and privilege. As the US shows, modernisation and GDP growth do not necessarily dissolve colour distinctions, and in their much-vaunted upward mobility, the Indian middle classes do not appear to have abandoned the old prejudices. Indeed, since so many now prefer to identify with their western counterparts rather than their impoverished compatriots, these prejudices are likely to be strengthened.
How does caste come into this?
Other than Ganguly I do not know who the other six brahmins are.
And like myself, there will be million Indians who doesn’t care.
Caste becomes an issue if it is proved
the BCCI is run by brahmins, who have all the selectors of that caste,
the team selection has been deliberately picked only brahmin players
and deliberately discriminated against worthy players from other castes.
I challenge the author to prove this.
This is the author’s attempt to pass off is personal and untrue assumption as an evidence. It is not only irrelevant in the present context I also resent his unsubstantiated insinuations.
The value attached to whiteness is a sickness in south Asian society, which badly needs the antidote of a “black is beautiful” movement. There are precedents in the lower caste insurgencies associated with Periyar (founder of Dravidian movement in south India) and Ambedkar (the Dalit, ie “untouchable” liberator). The skin colour hierarchy can in the end only be uprooted by a transformation in attitudes towards caste, marriage, the female and male bodies, and social stratification in general. But the first step has to be breaching the widespread reluctance to acknowledge or discuss the realities of racism in Indian society. The Indian response to the accusation against Harbhajan indicates that this will be an uphill battle.
Does this author understands what “racism” really is?
Or he seriously believe we, as Indians,
are incapable of defining racisms.
What he describes
is more a “sickness” of many white societies?
I am yet to see a neo-nazi group of fairskinned Indians
goose-stepping through the neighbourhood of coloured Indians?
He equates an individual’s colour preference as racism.
He also wrongly generalises that every Indian prefers whites over others.
Indians in general do not accept homosexuality, would he also condemn
an Indian’s reluctance to accept certain sexual preference
as another “reality of racism in Indian society”?
This is irresponsible journalism.
the7new7ramanujan said this on January 9th, 2008 at 18:18
hem hem …… he says as if his country doesnt suffer from this syndrome. actually this color preference brings about racism in the so called first world countries. not only irresponsible, it is biased journalism, what is called a drawer effect in experiments ( unwanted results get into drawers, they are never published ).
MsCutePants said this on January 10th, 2008 at 05:43
In most Indian movies & TV shows fair actors and more specifically actresses are the only ones getting any camera time. Hubby, who is of West Indian origin always asks me why this is so?
What’s ironic is that in most American shows it’s the darker Indian actors & actresses that get face time. You rarely see a fair Indian actor on one of the many shows out there that have begun to incorporate Indo Americans in their shows.
When is India going to learn that out here in the West, the darker chocolaty skin tone is envied, and so desperately desired.
No I don’t think the investigation is justified against the Indian cricket player for his choice of words. They are definitely not racist. But the author does bring up some interesting point. I do feel that India is racist when it comes to skin colour. I hear comments like, (oh she’s pretty, she’s white fair), which is totally ridiculous. I know plenty of fair girls who look like horses, but their fairness is equated with beauty. I also know plenty of darker girls who have the most beautiful features. Unfortunately they do get overlooked.
Ironically once an Indian person leaves India and makes for the West, darker skin tones is not so much of an issue nor a factor, but a thing to be desired.
Nice post! Thanks for letting me hog your comment space.
littleindian said this on January 10th, 2008 at 12:24
@ MsCutePants
Thanks for stopping by.
You are most welcome to hog as much of the comment space as you wish. 🙂
What I want to differentiate is personal choice from discrimination.
If someone has to choose between two individuals of the same community, language, religion, and obviously race, to be a life-partner, and chooses a fair or dark individual for what ever reason, then that is the individual’s personal choice and not racism.
There are many Indians who will prefer a dark person.
There are white individuals who prefer blondes over brunettes, surely is not racism.
We cross into the domain of discrimination when a person prefers one to the other from the belief that one group is “superior” than the other in any aspect as a person.
And that belief becomes racism when it is equated to a whole race; i.e. coloured individuals are inferior, Indians are coloured so ALL Indians are inferior.
My objection to this authors article is he has raised issues which are irrelevant to the situation in reference.
He feels he has to prove Harbhajan Singh was being racist because Indians are racist in general.
That is deliberately irresponsible.
littleindian said this on January 10th, 2008 at 12:35
@ newramanujan
I will say thanks for visiting.
Rational comments are hard to come by these days.
Most of what I receive these days are personal abuse.
I have lived in both worlds, the white-man’s and our coloured.
I have seen people with varying preferences, from strict to perverse.
I see people claim to uphold individuals rights and freedom.
Then I read an article like this where an author uses twisted logic to call Indians racist, while true racism is rages on in white community.
If a white Australian cricketer abuses a coloured Indian it is defined a sledging, a tough approach to playing the game.
But if a coloured player allegedly abuses another coloured player in an otherwise all white team, that is racism.
Pathetic.
harbhajan ban | Save your news said this on January 11th, 2008 at 01:35
[…] are indians racists? – or is this asinine journalism? […]
News rep site » sydney herald said this on January 11th, 2008 at 04:35
[…] are indians racists? – or is this asinine journalism? […]
Prax said this on January 11th, 2008 at 21:19
well pawar is an obc and a Maratha
so how is bcci run by brahmins ???
and then why not impliment reservations in indian cricket then??
littleindian said this on January 12th, 2008 at 10:33
Thanks Prax,
I didn’t know about Pawar, but it supports my point.
This is biased journalism, the author trying to derive maximum benefit for himself, misleading readers with his assumptions and incorrect interpretation. Perhaps deliberately.
mysoul said this on January 16th, 2008 at 17:40
Looking back, A preference by someone in either a position of power or a position of fame, when taken up in huge numbers by those who are not in such a position, it becomes discrimination. If that discrimination happens between people of different shades of skin colour it is labeled as racism (whether that is true or not, no one cares, it will carry the label, thats reality). If it happens between people of the same colour its labeled “class discrimination” If it happens between two people belonging to different regions then it becomes – ethnocentric/Xenophobia.
Everything has a name and Names like Rascism makes circulation of Newspapers go high :). Its economic.