Here at Sepia Mutiny, we often get into long debates in the comment thread of Indian-American versus the South Asian American. With elections right around the corner and all the focus on ‘issue based politicizing,’ the conversations often revolve around people who identify as Indian-American tend to care more about South Asian foreign policy and less about their lives here in America as an ‘American’ first, and vice versa for people that identify as South Asian American.
So the real question I see is as ‘Americans’, whether South Asian or Indian/Bangladeshi/Pakistani/Sri Lankan – American, are our issues domestically really that different? Should we be asking ‘what issues are desis interested in’ when we really should be asking ‘what issues affect the the desi community?’
Let me present you the information, and you make the educated judgement for yourself…The following numbers are based on the national demographics profile recently released by key APIA research organizations.
- Education: We know the model minority sterotypes — desis are ‘supposed’ to be the most educated. The truth is 23% of Bangladeshis have less than a high school degree, higher than national average of 20%. Pakistani (19%), Asian Indian (15%), and Sri Lankan (14%). On the other hand, as far as college education is concerned, 61% of Asian Indians have a bachelors or advanced degree, 42% of Pakistanis and 45% of Bangladeshis.
- Poverty: One doesn’t think that poverty affects the desi community — looking simply at the median household income we see that it is higher than the national and higher than non-Hispanic whites at $45,576 for Pakistanis, $52,392 for Sri Lankans, and $61,322 for Asian Indians. Bangladeshis we see fall the lowest at $37,074. When delving further we see that 15% of Bangladeshis and Asian Indians have 3 or more workers per family. Pakistani at 14%, Sri Lankan at 12% — the national number is 12%. But when comparing these numbers to the percentage of people below poverty level we see that all South Asians have a higher percentage than whites (8%): Bangladeshi 23%, Pakistani 18%, Sri Lankan 10%, and Asian Indian 10%. Seeing such ‘high’ numbers of poverty in our community, it’s sad to see that public assistance for this community is far less: 4% of Bangladeshi, 2% Pakistani, 2% Asian Indian and 1% Sri Lankan.
- Housing: Though nationally, 66% of Americans own homes, and 72% of whites own homes, the numbers for South Asian Americans is less than this. 25% of Bangladeshis, 40% of Pakistanis, 47% of Asian Indians, and 50% of Sri Lankans. Unfortunately, the overcrowded housing issue is far worse — 6% nationally live in over crowded housing, 2% of Whites, where as 43% of Bangladeshis, 31% of Pakistani, 21% of Sri Lankans, and 18% of Asian Indians.
- Assimilation: Though the immigration laws that gave South Asians our immigration boom happened in 1965, we still see a high rate of foreign – borns in our community: 83% of Bangladeshis, 79% of Sri Lankans, 74% of Pakistanis and 73% of Asian Indians. Comparatively, the national foreign born rate is 11%, for whites 4%, and for Latino 40%. The naturalization rate of foreign-born is 31% for Bangladeshis, 38% of Sri Lankans, 40% of Asian Indians, and 40% of Pakistanis. Nationally the rate is 40% and 55% for Whites.
Of course, the issues mentioned above are based on data we have access to from the the national Census. What about the types of information where data doesn’t exist and thus inferences for our community has to be poorly estimated based on the data we do have? Such as healthcare — with such an economically divided community, how many in our community are unable to afford healthcare? What are the health disparities within our community, such as higher rates of ovarian cancer, diabetes, and low birth weight babies? What is the divorce rate for our community, life span in our community? Rate of domestic violence and sexual assault?
Domestically, I feel that our issues, as South Asian Americans, are not just narrowed to racial profiling and hate crimes, but rather, we have a breadth of issues that affect our community. I largely believe in two things with regards to South Asian American issues — the first is that not enough research is being done for and by our community to really investigate what issues are affecting us and the second is the community is not being educated enough about themselves. I challenge you to ask your family if they had realized that the numbers were so drastic as in the issues I listed above in education, housing and poverty. I highly doubt anyone (in our family) knows that these types of disparities exist. Though some are making differences, even more needs to be done.
Sure, we can ask South Asian Americans what issues are important to them, but the chances are they will answer in the typical with ‘economy, education and foreign policy.’ But I do believe that if we educate the community on the issues that are affecting them, as well as encouraging dialogue within the community, that the answers will be different. Are there issues that will potentially unite desis? I don’t know, and frankly, I don’t think we are there yet. Should we identify as Indian American or South Asian American? Domestically and politically, especially looking at these above issues, I think we have too much at stake to not identify as a South Asian American political community. But I’m not here to tell you how to think, just present for you the research and facts. I’ll let you make the educated decision yourself.
All data pulled from A Community of Contrasts: Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in the United States, a demographic profile created by the Asian Pacific American Legal Center and the Asian American Justice Center. The report is not online, but can be ordered through the AAJC.
propz for offering statistics. my comments in the next comments… 😎
Why Indians are US’s best immigrant group
http://ia.rediff.com/money/2006/sep/20indians.htm?q=np&file=.htm
This is a recent article (sep 20, today!)- exactly about issues bought up in this post – focus is on indian americans
Census data show that 81.8% of Indian immigrants arrived in the U.S. after 1980 (!!!). They received no special treatment or support and faced the same discrimination and hardship that any immigrant group does. Yet, they learned to thrive in American society
Taz/Razib, You both are up at some bizarre hour; one churning out stats and the other reading it all. Go to sleep nerds;) Very informative post Taz. Could you furnish some details on the ratio of Desi men to Desi women in the US; is it more or less even or disproportionate as in the Middle East? Peace
Education:
USA median – Bachelor’s degree or higher, pct of persons age 25+, 2000, 24.4% cite High school graduates, percent of persons age 25+, 2000, 80.4% (vs. 77% among bangladeshis, the worst performing brown group)
context matters. i think the education numbers speak for themselves, but they speak louder when you know the numbers of the “average” americans who have are so qualified.
Poverty & Housing:
both these need to be put in the context of the fact that south asians are geographically concentrated. this probably exaggerates their income, but also explains the low home ownership rates and overcrowding. if brown people want to own a home (hell, if anyone wants to own a home), you can move to nebraska. additionally
Assimilation:
the foreign born nature of browns can also explain lower home ownership and high poverty rates. many older immigrants end up on state support because it isn’t like they have the accrued assets to live of off.
finally, the biggest issue is the implied parity of the communities. but the most deprived community, bangladeshis, is trivial in numbers compared to the stereotypical ‘model minority’ community, indians.
Indians – 1,645,510 88.4% Pakistanis – 153,533 8.3% Bangladeshis – 41,280 2.2% Sri Lankans – 20,145 1.1% cite
i think more data and more education is important. but more data means more ways to selection bias and frame the data 😉
as for politics, i think a progressive and liberal political vision is easy to sell to south asians. but not because the community is oppressed or in need of government aid, but, because south asian youth are educated, idealistic and, unfortunately (from my perspective), often susceptible to identity politics. but all these do not necessarily lead to a specifically south asian, as opposed to liberal, political philosophy.
Go to sleep nerds
i have a database to configure.
The overcrowding issue – I can only speak for the UK, but this is a self produced problem that often gets cited as evidence of structural inequality or poverty attributable to a number of extrenal factors. But I have known of Bangladeshi families of 12 children living in a small house with three bedrooms. Then you start off a cycle of underacheivment because children dont get the attention and discipline they need to do well at school. Sometimes, we have to look inwards to explain certain discrepancies and weaknesses inside us.
vat! no graphs… ?
🙂
nice analysis. one thought. .. given that immigrants typically dont have a social legacy – think the people living in new york getting by on trust funds etc. – the income levels are somewat surprising.
one additional piece of data to compare and contrast would be the number of self-employed people. because the income reported by those folks is vastly different from those guys who draw a salary – and anyone with half a nut in the shell would know it makes sense to reduce tax liability by parking as much monies as possible under business expenses. just a thought… but i just think there is something missing here if the incomes are so low… median income would be interesting as well.
Another reason for the figures regarding overcrowding is the percentage of young male immigrants in blue collar jobs. The pattern is for young men to share accomodation and live in what are effectively ‘flop houses’, people sleeping on the floor, one man rising to work at dawn as another comes in from driving his taxi on the night shift to sleep in the same bed. This is until they establish themselves, and in the best desi style it is the cheapest thing available allowing them to save money to move on and buy a place of their own or whatever their ambition is. As long as you have fresh migrant inflows you will have this.
The example I used in my post # 6 was an extreme one, but I wonder if the larger-than-the-average families of even middle class desis, in which say two youngest sisters share a bedroom, leads to this percentage of overcrowding thing as well, when overcrowding is defined according to the national mean and each child having a room of their own, that kind o fthing. And then images of Bombay and Calcutta shanty towns loom in the imagination.
An example of the said identity politics-:
senaX’s presumption that “[Indians] learned to thrive in American society” is refutable and mythic. A whole host of socio-economic variables are a function of success- the financial capital you immigrate with, your level of education, your ability to speak english, the socio-economic network you plug yourself into upon arrival (shopkeepers, blue-collar labor, etc), including other discriminating variables. To presume that some groups “learn to thrive” while others don’t “learn” and thus remain marginalized or enjoy less income per capita is the type of circular sloppy thinking that is born and nurtured in success bubbles.
And Razib, being educated and idealistic does not necessarily bring about a liberal political vision. An argument articulated by Brad Delong, where he discusses the legacy of John Kenneth Galbraith, provides a critique:
I find the pick-yourself-up-by-the-boot-straps mentality quite dominant amongst browns when probed deeply. I think one result of that mentality in part plays into Taz’s excellent points that 1) we have little research on our community and 2) we know very little about ourselves and our condition in America. The cause perhaps is a tendency to draw conclusions about self, group, etc., through anecdotes, assumptions, group-think, and popularized brown poster boys and girls of success.
Kudos to you Taz for bringing to our attention statistics about the less fortunate diaspora. If any of the above sounds jumbled I blame the hour =)
presumption that “[Indians] learned to thrive in American society” is refutable and mythic.
my bad boss – this is acutally an exceprt from the article i linked to
should have made that clearer …
I don’t think you should knock or stigmatise that mentality. It’s not an intrinsically bad mentality to have. But it should be tempered and shouldnt be taken to be the norm.
Agreed. It becomes problematic when it becomes part of policy and frames policy debates.
Or when it’s used to compare other minorities who might not have had as much intellectual capital to start with.
It strikes me as wrong on a more visceral level as well – it comes across as smug and sanctimonious and triumphant, and as Vivek says, it can be distasteful. I think the boot-straps mentality is the right one to have, but with a sense of realism and sympathy.
One example of how this can be burst was when I think Razib said in the thread in the aftermath of the Montreal shooting that he was glad desis in the US were not so f***ed up, prompting someone to immediately point out that a desi in America had already gone on a murderous psycho shooting spree. OK, I know it’s a facile argument, but every shiny happy people headline begins to grate after a while, if for no other reason that it makes you complacent, and sometimes self-congratulation can seem like masturbation too.
I apply all my comments to the UK experience as well, every time the Sunday Times publishes a separate ‘Richest Asians in Britain’ supplement when it produces its annual ‘Britain’s Rich List’, for example.
Taz,
Thanx for all the stats. It would be better if you could segment these nationality groups into FoBs 1st gen and 2nd gen and then run the stats. When starting indicators are considered, such as high school and college edn., FoB stats tell us more (if not all) about the conditions back home than here. And so too to some extent for Employment, Housing, and income. Or maybe one shd look at 2nd gens only. In the UK although reports don’t seem to say so, 2nd and 1st gens seem to outnumber the FoBs. As far as politics goes for Indian-Americans the responsiveness of the political system in this country comes as a welcome change from the conditions back home. Their votes do matter here and so they do participate in the system.
Mangalam,
Desis in Britain who have recently arrived from the Indian subcontinent are massively outnumbered by 1st Gens and (even more) by 2nd Gens.
The vast majority of South Asians in the UK were born here; the largest waves of immigration were during the late 60s and early 70s, both from East Africa and directly from the subcontinent.
I disagree, in part, that susceptibility to identity politics is a bad thing. I think it’s bad when identity politics shift the focus from important issues (poverty, housing, crime, etc.) to less important ones that grab bigger headlines (e.g., racial profiling and hate crimes). I say that not to minimize the impacts on victims of profiling and hate crimes, rather in pure numbers there are far fewer individuals affected when compared to the former issues. However, I do think that identity plays a role in creating a community that carries more political clout. We have discussed ad nauseum the importance of recognizing the cultural diversity in the South Asian diaspora, and the dangers of assuming that we will all vote as one block. However, the more issues in which we can participate as a group, the more political clout we can carry. An example would be the unity and political discipline that religious conservatives exercised during the 2004 presidential election campaign. If South Asians can identify political issues that relate to identity, and affect us as a whole, I don’t think it’s a bad thing to take advantage of those commonalities in the political forum.
Taz, great work laying out the comparative stats across national-Americans.
It’s clear from these stats that when it comes to those categories – most importantly education and income for me – there are significant numbers of people in EACH national group who are privileged as well as those who are underprivileged. There is no national group which is totally well-to-do, nor is there one which is totally destitute.
So the situation is that within each national group there are conflicting class interests, and between each national group there are conflicting – well, all sorts of interests.
When it comes to differing class interests, I don’t really see any difference between South Asian Americans and any other Americans. I support universal health care, better public education (NOT tied to property taxes), and a whole slew of progressive issues on the domestic front. I’d have just as much of a chance of getting a rich Tamil Brahmin to agree with me on these issues as I would a rich Boston Brahmin.
Clearly these class divisions exist. What incentive can we provide for the establishment of solidarity between South Asian classes, and how does this differ from any incentive we could provide for class solidarity in a wider American context? Wouldn’t such an incentive (be it ethical or somehow material) be a requisite for the establishment of a sense of South Asian community?
I think the New York Taxi Workers Alliance is a fantastic example of working class, immigrant South Asians transcending national identity and working in solidarity towards a common material goal.
But what about other contexts where national identity rules out solidarity between national groups? For example, what do you do about the USINPAC-type who puts Indian strategic interest ahead of everything when it comes to South Asian politics? Is someone like that likely to want to build solidarity with Pakistani or Bangladeshi Americans?
Also, about the South Asian identity as a whole: what exactly is India’s place within it? In the comment thread of a recent post on brown identity at PTR, kettikili put it most articulately:
Some of the numbers which struck me most are from the Sri Lankan American community; I had no idea that the numbers are that staggering So when you say this:
I agree, but are there really enough people out there thinking of South Asian Americans as a community? Are underprivileged South Asian Americans better off seeking solidarity with other underprivileged ethnic groups than with affluent South Asian Americans on issues which affect their daily lives and livelihoods?
excellent article taz!
I think one can argue about the validity of th statistics as razib has done quite well. But, even if issues like poverty and overcrowded housing are genuinely serious issues facing the desi community, I don’t think you’d find much agreement on the solutions. I think more fertile terrain for mining issues desis can come together on have to do with maximizing opportunity. Most immigrants come to america because it is the land of (fairly equal) opportunity and even second+ generation desis have a large stake in the opportunity issue.
Policies that will maintain and improve America’s ease of opportunity include:
mangalam,
I disagree. Mind you, my work makes me a big fan of pulling out hte data for 18-24 yr olds. But in the context of this paper, “what is a community” –? Whether looking at Indian American or South Asian American, our community is not divided by foreign born rates, nor are they in the policy world going to be divided by ones foreign born status. This is self evident when in the issue of racial profiling, people don’t ask “Where you born here?” before they start profiling you.
FoB stats, from the national census, completely tells us about FoBs IN america, not back home. Sure, demographically there may be differences between foreign born and native born, but we are still creating a desi community together.
the more political clout we can carry
this presupposes what “we” is.
senaX:
isn’t that the same exact article Siddartha discussed over here? It’s just in syndication now. Lovely.
Great info, Taz, Razib, Vivek, Sriram, and others.
A few things strike me in general about these discussions. One is how quickly they move beyond my own limited scope of knowledge! Another is the sheer amount of intellectual prowess concentrated in one virtual forum. The debates and even the statistics are fascinating for someone like me. It’s remarkable how willing this little SM community is to understand, analyze, and discuss socio-economic issues for our community.
I kind of wish we’d do the same with socio-psychological issues, too.
With regard to Vivek’s well-made point about where we draw the lines, and why they need to be drawn and redrawn…well, let’s assume for a moment that there are sufficient numbers of “us” (Razib, “us” is whoever we say it is, by dint of participating in the discussion. Consider this the First Brown Constitutional Congress)(heh). You gotta start somewhere…
So there are enough “us” to generate the question, anyway. Which means there are enough “us” to start looking out for “our” interests, and enough “us” to disagree with anything a majority group of “us” might say regarding a single cohesive policy on immigration, or religion, or education, for instance. Taz’ point becomes very important, then, because the natural next step is identity politics, and identity politics leads to the politicizing of certain issues and the exaggeration of their importance in the big picture.
Umang, some agreement can be found with regards to solutions to the “big picture problems,” like overcrowded housing, educational parity (I’d love to see stats on that one, correlated to age bracket), and immigration-related issues. The problem becomes maintaining unity in the face of disparate (and sometimes competing) interests, in the interests of furthering the greater good.
Bear in mind, since ours (there it is again, “ours”) is such a diverse community, one of the responsibilities each of us have is to consider issues from all angles, or as many as I can try to imagine. Just because I’m a 2nd-gen, Ohio-born kid doesn’t mean I get to overlook immigration issues or decide they don’t apply to me, for instance. I have to try and consider them from the perspective of the newly immigrated Bangladeshi, or the H1-B who just lost her job and is now in danger of losing the rest of her carefully-built American life, or a couple with kids who just stepped off the plane from India. Then I need to vote and speak sympathetically. The issues and problems become apparent then, and not the dividing lines of nationality or religion or creed.
I don’t believe in unity at all costs, but I do think we need to start looking for unity where we can find it.
Timely post, Taz
When the US census bureau results came out clumping all kinds of races together, I was wondering how relevant some of the information is going to be. The average life expectancy for example.
If that is the average, which group of Asians belong in either end? Where does a Tamil/telugu girl fit in there?
More dangerous is grouping people of various races and cultures together for healthcare statistics. What does a Punjabi American woman and a Japanese American woman have in common when it comes to dietary habits? The first has the highest heart disease rate and the second the lowest. Average them and you get harmful data. Would it be better for the Punjabi American woman to look at her native state’s statistics?
Stop eating Dal Makhni immediately! Instead of checking one of boxes under race, we should be provided with a number that is a composite of where our parents are from, their race and ethnicity. Is this possible?
Wow, BidiSmoker. That’s fairly harsh.
Because to do anything else would be going down the path of complete and total Balkanization of a young and growing community struggling with forging a place for itself politically, socially, and culturally. We are different, we come from different countries, we face different issues. But the rest of the world (or even the US!) doesn’t see it that way, and that alone should be reason enough to think carefully about our commonality. It’s our job to bring those issues to the forefront of the discussion. That means you need to think like a Bangladeshi, or a Pakistani, or an Indian, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or like an older person, or like the disenfranchised. It’s not easy, and it doesn’t come naturally, but it’s the only choice that makes any sense at all.
I don’t think we’ll emerge as one homogenous voting bloc, either. But so what? As long as we’re one voting bloc, we don’t need to be homogenous. There are enough of us, concentrated enough in certain areas, and spreading fast enough to other areas, that getting communities to agree to issues we consider important as a community should be a no-brainer. I’d be highly inclined to support a NJ mosque’s right to operate near a major shopping center in the face of public disapproval, because while I’m not Muslim, and may have little to do with their mosque, I can see where their interests overlap with mine and my own immediate Punjabi-Hindus-from-the-South community. And I’d hope that in the future, our communities would strive to build that kind of rapport with each other.
If the demographics were reversed, and the “community” was 80 pc Pakistani, would there even be talk of a self-identifying South Asian community? My sense is that the biggest proponents of the identity are Indian-Americans. Pakistani Americans I’ve talked to don’t seem particularly enamoured of it, though my sample consists of just friends and work colleagues.
Pakistani Americans I’ve talked to don’t seem particularly enamoured of it, though my sample consists of just friends and work colleagues.
i recall a show on NPR about asian americans, and a pakistani american called in and said he considered himself a ‘muslim american.’ i think that is the key, muslim browns have a non-brown identity. to a lesser extent, so do christian browns. hindu & sikh browns though only have south asian identities, so of course they would bring it to the fore.
Bidismoker @ #25
I’m sure there are bidismokers from Bangladesh : ()
As South Indian Americans, we have a sizable Christian and Muslim minorities, so you would be better off with VHP(with more north Indian membership) than South Indians as a bloc. If all South Asians work as a group, we represent more voters and even if we disagree on certain Issues, Indian and Hindus will be a majority and will have more influence. We’ll be better off in America sticking together as Desis, or else the system will screw us. AS if we don’t have enough problems in common.
irresponsible leaders on both sides are making it that way. we can sit back and let that happen, and then announce we’re on the right side, or we can challenge the generalizations, shortcuts, hypocrisies and lies. it’s an individual choice; apparently you’ve made yours…
p.s. it is also important to note that the most frequent commenters of muslim origin on this blog, myself & AMJ, are not religious (i do not identify as muslim, and i don’t believe AMJ does either). the point is that brown identification can come to the fore when you have no other options….
i recall a show on NPR about asian americans, and a pakistani american called in and said he considered himself a ‘muslim american.’ i think that is the key, muslim browns have a non-brown identity. to a lesser extent, so do christian browns. hindu & sikh browns though only have south asian identities, so of course they would bring it to the fore.
I buy that. Also I’m talking political identities. There’s obviously much cultural commonality throughout S. Asia, as this blog admirably represents.
desitude (#29):
Did you get a sense of why? Might it have something to do with the sentiment in the comment I quoted in #19?
Question:
I’ve never heard of a Sri Lankan Sinhala identifying as South Asian. Have you?
BidiSmoker:
I didn’t realize that working together with Pakistani-Americans, Muslim-Americans, Islamo-fascists, or whatever you want to call them actually precludes working together with African-Americans (and you do realize that there’s overlap between Muslims and African-Americans, didn’t you?). We choose our commonality. We may not agree with African-Americans on affirmative action policies for public universities, yet agree with their overarching ongoing civil-rights struggle and find our common ground in their history of activism. Likewise, we may not
The thing I keep coming back to over and over is how much this needs to happen. Americans frequently simplify and reduce things to sound-bite sized intellectual McNuggets. To the average joe on the street, there’s not a lot of difference between a Pakistani and an Indian, until he finds a negative through experience. Then he can say, “I don’t like Pakistanis,” or “I don’t like Indians because…”
Your way allows this to continue, and even makes it worse.
siddhartha (#33):
Well put, that.
I think most pan-South Asian issues are of the variety that also affect other Asian-Americans, African-Americans and Latino-Americans.
yep.
It’s all about Icebergs people. Icebergs.
Yes, yes I have. I’d edit your statement to say “Sri Lankan Sinhala AMERICAN identifying as South Asian AMERICAN.”
My idea to solve needless controversies .. Change the term ‘South Asian American’ to ‘Brown American’.. 🙂
Replace the ‘geographical grouping’ with ‘grouping based on color’. You can avoid the unnecessary issues that crop up in different regions that constitute the geography..
Or better yet, Macaca American.
i like brown american!!!
brownz rule!
p.s. it is also important to note that the most frequent commenters of muslim origin on this blog, myself & AMJ, are not religious (i do not identify as muslim, and i don’t believe AMJ does either).
I dont identify as Muslim either though I am a little different from Razib as in I am an apostate (left Islam) while Razib has never really been Muslim and is at best of Muslim ‘origin’. I dont think Ikram is particularly religious either. Maybe Taz is the mullani in da house!
I cant believe we are discussing the South Asian American versus Indian American thing again! This might be possibly the most discussed topic on SM.
irresponsible leaders on both sides are making it that way. we can sit back and let that happen, and then announce we’re on the right side, or we can challenge the generalizations, shortcuts, hypocrisies and lies. it’s an individual choice; apparently you’ve made yours…
Word.
To add further,
‘Brown American’ is a more apt term.. ‘South Asian American’ is not the right term for people who are born and brought up in America, maybe it is right for their parents/ancestors who were from South Asia. The second generation folks would have hardly visited South Asia for a few months in their entire life time and except for a very few would know very little about the region..
If the idea behind ‘South Asian American’ is derived from ‘African American’, I think it is a mistake. I guess ‘Brown’ is not used in a derogatory manner as ‘Black’ and the countries in Africa (as far as I know) are not hostile with each other as in the case of ‘South Asia’.. It would reduce the heartburn (of Indians) for creating artificial parity between India and other countries in the region..
touché 🙂
I was initially curious about, as you say, Sri Lankan Sinhala Americans identifying as South Asian American, but now that you mention it, I don’t know how they identify with South Asia in other parts of the world either. Could you elaborate?
vivek, one of SMs guest bloggers wuz sinhala i believe.
Ummmm…. Wasn’t that the point of the post? 😛
I’m reading the comments, though I have no time to post responses today- but I do have to say that though we keep beating this topic like a dead horse, that the arguments based today on actual numbers is a lot better than the hearsay arguments we’ve had in the past.
Carry on…
Al-Mujahid, apostasy is cool. Respect!
Has it occurred to anyone that beating a dead horse is a great way to make leather?
but I do have to say that though we keep beating this topic like a dead horse, that the arguments based today on actual numbers is a lot better than the hearsay arguments we’ve had in the past.
amen!