Two people are dead and 115 people remain injured after 350 bombs detonated in or around government buildings all over Bangladesh today. (Thanks, Rahul.) The explosions which were apparently the work of Islamic militant group Jamayetul Mujahedin affected 63 of the country’s 64 districts. [link]
The bombs exploded in rapid succession between 10:30 and 11:30 in the morning, local time. From the BBC:
…timing devices were found at the scenes of blasts but most of the bombs were small, homemade devices – wrapped in tape or paper.
One of the deaths was a young boy in Savar, near Dhaka, who was killed when he picked up a device. [link]
The group responsible for the blasts was banned by the Bangladeshi government earlier this year; previously, the government had insisted that Bangladesh didn’t have a problem with Islamic Militancy, so this policy change was significant.
Leaflets from the Jamatul Mujahideen Bangladesh have appeared at the site of some of the blasts.
“It is time to implement Islamic law in Bangladesh” and “Bush and Blair be warned and get out of Muslim countries”, the leaflets say. [link]
Developing…
Ask the Mutinous hosts if you can guestblog. If you’re feeling underrepresented in another locale, speak up… It’s a blog, not a network– there is no obligation on SM’s part to be ‘fair and balanced’… blogs are opinions and brain spew.
(not directed at you, personally, Ikram. Directed at the collective You)
Moornam, if by your own words this is the best metric than I could care less about terrorism. I would be much more worried about global warming and a host of other problems. How do you figure “tens of millions” killed in a nuclear attack?
I just read your whole comment again. No offense but I hope you never become a policy maker.
Yeah, but if that’s the case, don’t you think we all have an obligation to stop fronting as much? I think the alternative is what Ikram posed: “The tag-line should, more honestly be ‘The world, mostly from an Indian-American perspective’…A few fix-ups to the FAQ, and you’ll have truth in advertising. And a lot fewer whinging commentors.”
I’d know I’d stop whining as much, although I’d be disappointed in the decision to choose to have a narrow vision and articulate it honestly rather than to take a more encompassing articulation of what it means to be South Asian and work towards making it a reality.
I do think, as the only and largest desi american group blog out there that I know of, SM would benefit from more holistically represnting the various perspectives of its community).
fair enough, Saurav.
I’m just here for the chai and samose. 😉
gc, you’re not the mainstream; you represent the mainstream perspective that comes from the perspective of a small group of people that have dominance among South Asians. With the exception of my sexuality and perhaps my politics (although I doubt it), I’m part of the same group. I just think it’s wrong to try to universalize it as you’re doing because you obliterate other people’s voices.
Your point about what we know and don’t know is the relevant one; if those perspectives were included more here, perhaps you would know more about what they care about. I agree with Manish that it doesn’t have to be here and am trying to figure out how I think this can be accomplished in the desi blogosphere, but given that SM is out there and heavily visited, I’m going to contest the space.
The various subsets I picked were the ones that I came up with in a list at 5 in the morning — I didn’t include women but I respect SM for at least taking minimal strides in that direction; I didn’t include South Indians because there is (or was, at least), a lot of mallu pride; I didn’t even include religion (although you could make the argument that it wouldn’t kill us to have someone coming from a Muslim background). But I’m open to being critiqued for not being inclusive enough.
And as for what I know–well there’s some truth to your argument about self-righteousness on my part and I apologize for that; but please don’t ever f#Wking assume again about what my life experience is without asking first. I’ve had developed relationships with people who are and were being deported; I’ve talked to countless working class desis on the street, at work, in their homes; I’m queer myself and have organized with other queer people–coordinating discussions about whether it makes sense to march in the India Day parade and blah blah blah; I have mixed race friends who have confessed to me their issues with authenticity and the fact that I was their only desi friend; etc. When you grow up queer in a homophobic desi home, when you think you’re an atheist at age 7, when you try to get your mother to buy you puja clothes in the women’s section on gender identity grounds, when you make choices to get outside your so-called “mainstream”–well then you can come back to me and talk to me about what I know and don’t know.
I’m not perfect, but when I say that there are people whose voices are marginalized in desi spaces, I know what the f@#k I’m talking about. And my suspicion here is that most everyone else here does too, even if they don’t care to admit it or deal with it.
Well this is ironic; I’ve managed to stifle your voice. I guess it’s time for me to shut up now.
oh no, not at all! You know it’s not that easy to shut me up 🙂 I’m just taking the quiet observer role today. (ok, for once… I’m trying it out!)Lots of interesting comments to think about, and I am preoccupied entirely with something IRL
as for the chai and samose, I was carrying out your directive not to front– I’m just all about the food.
I’ve come a little late to this party.
First off – about how many people die from AIDS vs bombs, I think you’re wearing blinkers if you think there are no manmade elements to things like AIDS pandemics. You’ve heard of the 90:10 split?
People in the developing world die of disease every day due to the rest of the world’s intention to not do anything about it. I’m not talking about millions of dollars in aid, I’m talking about reducing drug profits nominally.
About South Asian/Desi/Indian etc debate. I kind of echo DesiDancer’s sentiments, I’m at least 4 of the things in your list Saurav, but I still enjoy reading bits and bobs on here – as well getting bored by other bits. I’m not overly fussed by the similarity of the SM staff, or how they define this blog. Sure I see your point and I agree that the scope of posts could be wider, but the comments facility exists so anyone can write up their views.
Oh Gori Observer – I don’t buy your argument about B&N though. But I’ll explain that to you in person or via email, long story. However I agree with you that there’s plenty out there on the web, it doesn’t all have to come from one site.
there’s just no pleasing some of you, is there?
saurav, if they do what ikram suggested, you’re disappointed. if they do what they are trying to already do and move beyond “indian-american” etc, you slam them for not hitting every item on your checklist.
what about this specific post was from an indian-american perspective, aside from the fact that it was written by one? i’m curious, in your opinion, can any of these SM bloggers write from anything BUT an “indian-american” perspective?
if they added a queer pakistani or a working-class illegal (assuming that this person even has the time and resources to blog. but who gets to blog/read blogs is a different issue), do you really think that the blog would read THAT much differently? i think desidancer is right– YOU want to blog here and until you do, SM isn’t going to be representative enough.
Here here. I left out “gourmand” from the list 🙂
Fair enough. Lack of honesty about identity descriptions in a political context are a pet peeve of mine (obviously) and in some sense my line of work, but it’s more than fair for other people who are potentially affected by the same things not to feel the same way as me or to not view this space through a political lens.
(1) As I understand it, SM works largely off of tips and what the mutineers see in the media, etc. SO – if you’re feeding them 10 tips a day on Fiji, or topics featuring Indo-Caribbeans, and not seeing it on SM – ya got beef. (No pun intended.)
If you’re not feeding the tips on the topics you want to see covered, well – get to it.
(2) The reason I was so shocked the bombings in Bangladesh didn’t get more coverage is not “because The Man doesn’t care” blah blah blah – as someone else commented, I’d expect that 350 bombs detonated in a country containing “Taliban-tendency terrorists” would mark more press.
Now to be fair to Saurav, I think all he’s objecting to is how they define SM in their description, he’s not claiming every post is from an Indian American perspective.
How about this:
SAVEMA (SM’s staff) are all brown. They are all of South Asian origin. They are all members of the South Asian diapora.
Hence they have every right to call this a brown, South Asian diaspora blog, right? Just like I could make a blog described as a British blog – I certainly wouldn’t be representing all Brits would I?
It does say ‘Come one, come all’ in the FAQ too, so I guess you could say they’re encouraging anyone to comment.
Clearly we all find something interesting about SM, which is why we’re here. The only criticism I’ll wholeheartedly agree with is that there’s nothing PUNK about SM! 😉
Otherwise, it’s all cool wit me yo.
No, I critique them for not trying.
And oh:
I think I want a platform like this but not quite this one–but, more to the point, yes, there’s truth to your accusation of ego.
The underlying issues I’m bringing up, though, would largely still be relevant, even if I chose to be coopted 🙂 Aside from being queer and some life choices I’ve made, a lot of my worldview is informed by the same background as the folks who blog here and hence I wouldn’t really expand the range of perspectives all that much.
Anyway, it seems like a lot of people are getting annoyed with this discussion, so I’ll just stop here–barring the unforeseen.
Saurav,
I shouldn’t even respond to your self-contradictory complaints. But at least I can take care of that annoying and inaccurate list:
working class people; Biju Mathew, taxi workers alliance
LGBT people; Queer India
people in South Asia; About 1/3 of all recent posts at Sepia Mutiny, including 17 on the front page (current posts) alone
Indo-Caribbeans; Guyanese Independence day
British Asians or members of other diasporas; You’re kidding, right? Did you miss the 300 posts on MIA, Jay Sean, Raghav, Bobby & Nihal, etc etc.? Hanif Kureishi and British Multiculturalism?
1st generation South Asian immigrants; 149 posts have had the word ‘immigrant’ mentioned
noncitizens; All of the recent posts dealing with profiling, unfair detentions and deportations have addressed the noncitizen issue. The posts on the disappeared Bangladeshi girls dealt with this in depth.
people who believe in mutinies; ???
people who are actually punk; I am way more punk than you, mofo
people who we decided are South Asian but don’t identify as such; ????
people who are mixed race; Katrina Kaif
non-Indian-Americans. this last is redundant with several of the previous
saurav,
thank you for responding. i went to your link and what i was struck by is how your “alternadesi” would essentially be as much of a “thought ghetto” as you accuse SM of being. i didn’t see any mention of including some of the viewpoints that are represented here, so how would that alternate space be anymore of a solution than this?
bongbreaker,
what, if any “punk” coverage would you like to see? 🙂
Abhi writes:I hope you never become a policy maker
For now, I’m content with electing policy makers of my persuasion. My man’s in the White House. The birds are a-chirping. The sky’s blue. The civilisational war is progressing exactly as it should. What more could I ask for?
BongBreaker:
We’re out of Kingfisher, but there’s plenty of Hieneken left!
Yes and No.
Yes, I know that AIDS is a manmade pandemic. Made and spread by men and women who share way too many needles and partners. Unfortunately, their children contract it by virtue of being born to morally loose parents. And some innocent people also contract it due to contaminated blood, unfaithful partners etc. It’s man-made allright.
No – I don’t know the 90:10 ratio. Something tells me you’re not talking about the ratio of liberals to non-liberals on this forum!
My humble request to you to let us know when you take up the job of a policy maker – I’ll have to sell all my drug stocks right away. A pity – they’ve given me consistent 20%+ returns.
What’s a “nominal” amount by which you will reduce drug profits to fit your agenda on how the world should work and how wealth should be distributed?
M. Nam
Now see. If you had simply stated that at the begining this discussion would have been more productive as we would have understood each other better. I am working on a system by which comment leavers such as yourself would get a red font, and comment leavers like me would get assigned a blue font. 🙂
Haha! That cracked me right up.
Galatea, I shouldn’t have said not being punk is a criticism, it’s not at all. To me SM is like a broadsheet. Let me explain. I have a fantastically over-inflated ego. I generally think I’m the world’s smartest man, with the exception of the chap who invented bubble wrap, but then I happened upon this wee blog and realised there are people out there who are smarter than me. I have got lots of gems from here which I later recount to my girlfriend or friends, it’s erudite, it’s thought-provoking and it’s a chance for me to hear views of people I generally don’t know much about – by that I mean South Asians in America.
However punk it ain’t. I take punk to mean young and rebellious, and having just checked, so does answers.com. Young – yep most people here are(ish!). Rebellious – nah. Sure that’s a massive generalisation and I don’t know the first thing about most of the SM chaps and chapesses, but from the posts the general topics are not tremendously out of the ordinary. This is NOT a criticism at all, please don’t take it that way. The vast majority of readers are regular folk too – in normal jobs doing normal things – and it would be silly to start pursuing off-beat topics or causes.
When I finally do get round to putting something up on the Internet, it will most likely be nowhere near as intelligent as the posts on here (especially Amardeep, way over my head!) but it may be a little bit more alternative; less mainstream. You’ll see!
Abhi writes:
I prefer saffron!!
Republicans would get a red font. Envornmentalists/PETA activists/Muslims – green. Feminists – pink. Democrats – blue. Gays – purple. SouthAsians – brown. Liberteranians, Hindutvadis – saffron. Blacks – black.
M. Nam
Agreed Abhi, when I read that it all fell into place!
MoorNam, the split refers to the fact that 10% of the world’s medical research money is allocated for 90% of the world’s population. Malaria is in fact the biggest killer in the world (some say HIV/AIDS – both are around 3-5 million/yr, estimated) and again this is massively underfunded. Now you’re argument is that we should spend more effort on countering terrorism than disease. Well OK, but then out of the money that is allocated to fighting disease, should we not prioratise spending on diseases that account for the most lives, or are lives in Africa worth less than Americans’?
This is an article from a magazine I occasionally write for, the student version of the British Medical Journal, which explains a bit more. An article from my newspaper details more about Big Pharma (page 9). Check out point number 9 – if profits fall, research won’t suffer.
I’m genuinely happy you’ve done well with you stocks, I’m not one of these people who begrudges someone for making money instead of giving it all away. But perhaps you should consider the ethics involved in just about every American pharmaceutical company’s progress and success. Like worldwide patents preventing India’s huge generic pharmaceutical market from manufacturing life-saving drugs for the needy in Asia, Africa and South America, for a fraction of the price.
Sorry, forgot the link. Page 9.
And Heineken sucks!
Not sure I agree with your colour-coding, don’t think we need to know everyone’s race or sexuality. Just the important thing – political allegiance!
Amardeep, let me try to be clearer and maybe this will resolve some of what i said which either was or appeared self-contradictory. SM can argue it’s a pan-South Asian space and make stronger efforts to move towards that, or it can do what Ikram suggested and label itself more honestly. I also think it’s dishonest to say “it’s just a blog” when this is a form of social capital and its bloggers have already been approached to speak on behalf of South Asians.
I’m muddled, not oblivious; when I talk about “voicese”, and “perspectives”, I’m referring to the structure of the blog and how that informs the language it brings forth in the writing as well as, but not exclusively, the selection of the posts. For example, to take this into somewhat less contentious territory: before you started guestblogging, there were not as many posts on literary topics from an academic perspective; before Turbanhead started guestblogging, that were imbued with references to married life). Similarly, when SM posts about London bombings and backlash, it might help to have someone from London present the perspective that comes there. Or if it posts on queer issues, it might help to have someone whose writing is imbued with a queer perspective–like Venial Sin.
Obviously, no space can encompass all of that, but I think that SM could do a little more than it does and have more of a commitment to the idea of being as inclusive as possible not just in obvious ways, but in a way that integrates the idea of inclusiveness into the values of the blog. If I had been more constructive and wiser, I would have stated up front that I think this is part of a broader conversation about the American desi subset of the blogosphere and how we can all work together to make sure that as comprehensive a vision of real-world desis as possible gets brought into what we do collectively while individually still being honest about who we are and being able to say what we want. And further that this is part of a larger project that 1.5/2nd gen americans who understand themselves as South Asian need to work towards. The same dynamics that I think play out in SM are dynamics that I see in other places–like the non-profit world.
~and~
There is no tagline: The FAQ is a glossary of terms. There is no tagline, there are no claims about what the blog is about or by whom it’s written. The closest thing to a tagline we’ve got is the blog description in the RSS feed, ‘All that savory brownness in one flavorful packet.’
Exclusivity bad: The tagline you suggest is pointlessly exclusive. The minute you put ‘Indian-American’ in the FAQ description, you turn off Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Brit Asians and so on.
about vs. by confusion: It’s not by a demographically representative sample of the diaspora (and what boring reading that would be), it’s about the diaspora.
about vs. for confusion: It’s not for ‘middle-class Indian-Americans,’ it’s about the diaspora. At a minimum, every non-desi reader understands that implicitly.
Describing vs. representing: Every blogger here is accurately described as a member of the South Asian diaspora. That doesn’t mean the blog’s mission is to fully represent.
No duty to represent: With a government or an ISA, there’s a situation of scarcity, exclusivity or monopoly. There’s no such situation here, and there’s no duty to be representative. There’s only the basic human courtesy of being interesting. And the best writing is by those who write what interests them. That’s that we do.
Saurav’s rant about including the Pakistani flag is perfectly legit as a personal sentiment. But it’s a steaming pile of horseshit as an attempt to force the bloggers to write about something and in a certain style.
In fact, his demands are contradictory: both to represent others, and to not claim to represent others.
if there’s one thing that really peeves bloggers, i think it’s telling them what they should write about, or should be about. 99% give their time and money gratis. i understand some of saurav’s complaint, and one reason i was interested in a poll is that i was curious as to the exact (or at least exacter) unrepresentativeness of SM. but that being said, sometimes you have to tack rather than head straight into the wind….
as for representing themselves as ‘south asian’ or ‘desi,’ even if the terms have a broad original connotation i think it is likely plausible that in the USA (for example) they will empirically tend to be characterize a narrowerer set. like i said, a far smaller number of ‘south asians’ are likely to be muslim than in south asia. if this blog is an example, punjabis, malayalees and bengalis are also way more overrepresented than their numbers in brownland. etc. etc. i’ve had my disputes with manish over being brown, and what that means, but ultimately, all this shitting about and commenting on the message boards is part of the process of brown (or south asian, or whatever).
isn’t a blog somewhat like an open diary? If a few people choose to get together and write in the same one, then all the more juicy for the
voyeursoh, I mean commenters… It’s not a real mutiny, there’s no need for hand-to-hand combat. It’s a party, Linda Richmond style. Talk amongst yourselves…It’s not and–it’s or–in my mind I’m trying to be undersatnding that it’s possible that you collectively simply don’t want to make this a more interesting, more full, more comprehensive South Asian diaspora blog that’s part of a South Asian diaspora community. That doesn’t mean Abhi or Manish or anyone else martyrs themselves to their readership by constantly and out of obligation writing things that they don’t want to; it means that you go out and find other people who will write about things because you think that they’re important to present from a particular standpoint but you know that you can’t or don’t want to do it yourself. But perhaps you’re not interested in that at all, so I give you an out and ask you just to be honest about who you are like Ikram did so you’re not pretending that you actually substantially give a $hit whether Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, queers, women, and others continue to visit.
What i think I’m more guilty of than self-contradiction is dichotomizing a spectrum of different standpoints ranging from “Indian-American blog” to “South Asian diaspora blog encompassing many different types of South Asian diaspora voices and accountable to the South Asian communities of the world” impatience with a process of identity formation, and more than my share of rudeness (and I apologize for that last one). And of course my own personal agenda.
As for “what this blog is” “taglines” and whatever else–if you think that social spaces are what the people in control of them say they are regardless of empirical realities–well, that’s your prerogative, but I think that’s a steaming pile of horseshit. The crux of the matter is: why are you willing to change your language to meet the perceived needs of Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Brit Asians, etc. but not change your blog lineup to draw them in? Why are you willing to present yourselves as South Asian but when you write a post about Indian independence, you’re not concerned with what Pakistanis will think then? Why are you willing to use the device of rebellion but not be truly rebellious? Why do some people feel comfortable commenting on particular topics but not others? Who lurks and why?
If this is just a blog, then let it be just a blog; and I will respond nicely like an obedient, complacent, reader. If this is a collective space, then let it be a space, and we’ll express our disagreements and have give and take, and you’ll cede some power to your readership and potential readership (the Times has a public editor). If this is a mutiny on the other hand (or rather, part of a mutiny), then let’s have a mutiny.
Manish wrote
2. Exclusivity bad: The tagline you suggest is pointlessly exclusive
No. The tag-line I wrote is accurate. The blog, like all blogs, is exclusive. It’s pointless to be inclusive of all the south asian diaspora — you’ll never succeed.
Better to be clear about what perspective you write from. The blog is well-written and interesting on it’s own. It’s doesn’t need pretentions of universality to succeed.
(And, as an aside, didn’t Saurav’s rant about the PK flag work?)
razib wrote:
all this shitting about and commenting on the message boards is part of the process of brown
Can I hear an Amen, my East-Pakistani friend.
Saurav writes:>>That doesn’t mean Abhi or Manish or anyone else martyrs themselves to their readership by constantly and out of obligation writing things that they don’t want to; it means that you go out and find other people who will write about things because you think that they’re important to present from a particular standpoint but you know that you can’t or don’t want to do it yourself.
Very well put.
Now let me rephrase this to Abhi and BongBreaker for our earlier discussion…
That doesn’t mean Pfizer or Merck or anyone else martyrs themselves to bleeding hearts by constantly and out of obligation producing drugs that they don’t want to; it means that bleeding hearts go out and find other drugmakers who will make drugs for Malaria etc because they think that they’re important to present from a particular standpoint but they know that they can’t or don’t want to do it themselves.
Standard scene I’m seeing in America since I set foot here: Conservatives demand control on speech/art. Liberal demand control on production and economy.
While your resident Liberteranian-Hindutvadi watches along amused…
M. Nam
I’m a lurker here and have been reading comments related to identity, and to SM’s role in the South Asian American space for awhile now.
I [maybe like saurav and desi dancer?] understood SM to be a collective space which is inclusive and open – and which could even be part of a larger “movement” that is identity-based and also values-based. But it kinda seems like, as Manish said, it’s a place where people post what is “interesting” to them. If that’s the case, then yeah – there’s no real need to be representative or comprehensive.
But what I’ve also seen is SM speaking on the community’s behalf and positioning itself as a space for all South Asians – and that justifies the questioning of whether it is truly open, and representative.
you see what you see lurker. i don’t see that at all. i mean, if this place was as serious as you depict, what do you say to the ubiquity of photos like this???
i think saurav has a point, but that’s why there are comment boards. i consider myself a dissenter from SM’s dominant zeitgeist, with the punjabi-mallu kuffur mafia ascendent.
in other words, only you can silence your own voice, we all have liberty to be arrogant assholes. this is amerika after all 🙂
All,
We should all have understood Saurav’s grudges about SM by now… He (assumption by name) wants to guest blog on SM like Amardeep and invade it with his extreme political eulogies.
Saurav,
The crux of the matter is: why are you willing to change your language to meet the perceived needs of Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Brit Asians, etc. but not change your blog lineup to draw them in?
You’re still arguing as if SM were some kind of international agency. It’s not.
Identitarian thinking is bad thinking for at least two reasons: 1) It’s never enough. If they invite a Sri Lankan to join them, the next question is of course — Tamil or Sinhala or Muslim or Burgher? Male or female? etc
And 2) Good blogging, like good journalism or good teaching, is more about what you know and how you think than about your background per se. Your background helps a little, but the actual line between a Punjabi Pakistani and a Punjabi Indian isn’t that great (that’s the whole idea of ‘desi’ to begin with).
I’m sure SM would value the voices & perspectives of bloggers from different backgrounds from themselves, but it’s their prerogative to decide whether the chemistry is right. It’s a surprisingly difficult balance to get right…
I would actually advocate going in the opposite direction from the one you propose — less ‘identity’ rather than more. For instance, I personally think it might be interesting to have non-desi bloggers at SM occasionally, blogging, as Manish puts it about desi issues — people like Andrea/Trilia or Ms. World. They are really good bloggers and they have strong interest in South Asian stuff. Those are the two most important criteria, IMO.
hammer_sickel, you are my favorite crazy ever for linking to the telemarketer calls from India to London on the day of the bombing. They were compelling (and funny) enough to begin with, but the fact that you feel that they’re an example of an “extreme political eulogies” on my part removes it to the realm of the lovably absurd. In all sincerity, thank you for unintentionally highlighting humanity in what has been an ugly, ugly conversation 🙂
Here’s the original post on CSF with links to the three audio calls.
Frankly, I didnt even read your post on CSF or whatever… was browsing over the titles to find an absurd one..”Capitalism Vs Jesus Vs Terrorism” – talk about linking!!
Anyway either you want to guest blog here on SM or want to shut this one down so others can only read your blog/clog.. hah.. Red tradition isnt it?
Well said Amardeep. Part of the reason this blog is attractive to me is the effort the mods put in commeting and moderating the topics. One thing SM should absolutely not deteriorate into is a survey site in the name of ‘diversity’ much like instapundit or desipundit. I usually don’t spend much time on such survey sites, instead I have my RSS reader pick up the ‘original/source’ blogs of interest. The guest bloggers idea is good if they are of the same quality as the current mods.
And 2) Good blogging, like good journalism or good teaching, is more about what you know and how you think than about your background per se.
I agree completely.
I wholeheartedly agree that an exclusive or fairly exclusive reliance on identitarian thinking is counterproductive. The reason I spoke in an identity framework above was because this conversation came out this statement by me: “there’s clearly an educated, American desi, middle class or uppwardly mobile, professional, identity-focused vibe to the blogging that happens here–at least in the posts” and what followed and probably some sloppiness on my part as I try to get over my own identity politics issues.
The proposal that you have is important and complementary to what I was suggesting–both are fundamentally coming from a place of wanting to expand viewpoints and move away from a rigid identity politics.
While it is hard to find voices that are both interesting and also break out of the mold, the response to my and other people’s requests to do so is usually not “we’re trying” although sometimes it admirably is. There are things like Abhi’s post on Niger and SM’s effort to try to recruit another female blogger (I think?) that are really, really good–even if they “only” turn out to be failed experiments. Beyond that, what about other ways to go about it? How about finding people who are not bloggers but can write to bring forward a perspective. We all know brilliant people who are doing immigrant rights work, lgbt work, and other things that SM could approach to write 1 post. If folks are willing to accept the underlying premise that it would be nice if there were a more diverse set of perspectives represented, at that point it would become a question of how and to what extent rather than why.
This blog is going to receive around 175,000 hits this month and its hits are increasing every month. That’s a lot of social capital given the ample present and future resources of the community that reads it. It presents political perspectives through commission or ommission often. Regardless of whether or not SM set out to acquire that capital, I think it’s fair to argue that posessing it makes it an object for consideration which falls somewhere between the public and private spheres more than “just a blog.” It’s a tool that a lot of 1.5/2nd gen desis read for information, it’s a space that people have used to build activism out of (like the Modi stuff and, ironically, media criticism), to form networks to find jobs and otherwise build connections among desis (which in turn are used to find jobs, etc.), and I’m sure is put to other uses by other people. It also relies heavily on contributions by commenters for its appeal. It’s a community space as well as being a blog.
Also, as I mentioned above, I think these issues are also relevant outside the context of this blog.
Let me break this down Saurav although I have tried to stay out of this debate. I have spoken to you offline so I know that your heart may be in the right place but I should be clear. This is about vision. Your vision for what Sepia Mutiny should be (and anybody else’s vision) doesn’t matter to me AT ALL. The only vision I care about is my own (and I have had a vision from day one), and that of my co-bloggers. Nobody will guilt us or force us into changing our tone, content, or anything else. We are also under no obligation to reveal how and for what reason we invite certain guest bloggers or how and why we pick our stories. People can speculate all they want but we still won’t give it up. Some comments above reveal that people actually think we just blog all day. We all have full-time jobs. THAT is often times the main discriminator of which stories get blogged and which don’t.
There is already a guest blogger who was invited a while ago that will probably be starting next week. I don’t want a discussion next week as to why we picked this person (although you can bet it’s because we liked their writing). It’s nobody’s business but our own. If someone thinks our blog sucks or doesn’t cater to them than they can move on. We aren’t an Empire. We are not going to recruit/conquer bloggers to dedicate most of their time writing for us at the expense of their own unique and interesting blogs. Also do you think a group blog is easy to run? If we just added “voices” willy-nilly SM would implode within weeks.
My point is you can all debate all you want but in the end what Razib said is true:
MoorNam, I’m not sure I’ve followed what you meant by:
Funny how a ‘libertarian’ labels someone suggesting the developing world gets a bum deal as a ‘bleeding heart’. Pfizer, Merck, GSK etc – DON’T ALLOW other drug companies to make drugs, so no matter what good intentions other ‘bleeding hearts’ have, it’s in vain. The patents are more damaging than anything. Sure, Pfizer don’t want to waste their time on some poor Africans, but other companies do. But they aren’t allowed.
self-criticism is good as a means to an ends. but sometimes it can become the ends. anyway, i’ve commented on plenty of weblogs where the bloggers are uninformed dumbasses who don’t know shit what they’re talking about. but, i do always come down on their side when someone doesn’t just criticize them, but tries to tell them that what they should be saying and doing. it’s like if people like to have fattie orgies in their house. if you like visiting their house for the pre-orgie snacks, and sometimes you have to see some fatties fucking, well, it’s their house, and you came in, no one forced you. as much as i detest the image of fattie orgies, i defend the right to engage in them within the bounds of one’s home.
mebee it be the libertarian piping up in me. i guess saurav sees this as if fatties are doing it in a public park to something in plain view, so people have a right to ask them to be a little more discreet or use positions that are less revealing of their privates, but i don’t view weblog communities that way at all. they’re like old style discussion salons, and in salons there was always someone hosting, directing and setting the terms of the social organism.
google “rahel levin germany salo.n” that’s manish (though he is better looking than her).
anyway, that’s enough of me taking up some of the bandwidth you paid for manish 🙂
That’s some analogy razib, some analogy.
a friend of mine had “observer” status at an orgie a few years back. said he saw a lot of fatties.
Fattie orgies. Haha, too funny.
Ergo, Saurav is Frank Costanza then. Costanza, he of the epic “A Festivus for the rest of us” crusade fame.
well, saurav likes short jewish dudes, so that’s apropos, isn’t it?
Yes, sahib. No problem, sahib. Anything else I can do for you, sahib?
I’ve done my share criticizing the middle class/upwardly mobile/professional hetero male Indian American values that imbue this blog and you’ve done your share in showing exactly how much this institution is willing to move even slightly towards other people’s suggestions for a broader vision. I guess we all have some sense of SM, its bloggers, their politics and values, the demographics of the desi community, and everything else that went into this conversation now–and I hope folks keep it in mind the next time SM touches on “injustices”, what it means to be desi, community, or media accountability and criticism.
All in all, it’s a shame, I guess, but it’s not the end of the world; those of us who want to will find other ways to develop community or will just stop aligning ourselves with desi identities like this one.
Good luck not becoming an echo chamber; I think you’re going to need it.
Fuck all yall, Saurav is the man. I’ve disagreed with him many times but he always comes up with well thought-out and articulate responses that make one think. If you are truly in search of knowledge and understanding, you have to understand your views and constantly exercise them. When I say exercise, I mean pull them and stretch them to test their vitality and validity. If you’re content with a masturbatory and self-laudatory perspective to life, (beautifully exemplified by the following quote), then stay content…but know you aren’t engaging in dialogue or even thinking that much.
Ohhh yeah, “you’re the man now dogg”
Saurav has always injected an interesting class based perspective to SM that is essential to many of the deep conversations that go on here. SO WHAT if he would like more coverage of this and that? SO WHAT if he thinks SM is horribly skewed in perspective? OK so you are the Sepia Mutiny god/sysop/whatever and you wont listen, thats cool. But don’t be hating on the man just because he expresses a view that offends your pride
Worst…analogy….ever.
Now everyone in SM sing in unison, “Saurav give me one more chance….”