Honest Injuns

Posted on by

osman.jpgThe selfless cab driver who returns the valuables some schmo left in his car is an urban archetype that never seems to grow old. It’s the sort of embodiment of working-class dignity that civic and business leaders draw on to signify that for all the hubbub and ambient edginess of city life, everything (and everyone) is ultimately in its right place. And in a context where, as is the case in most large American cities, taxi workers tend to be immigrants, every instance when a cabbie can be celebrated for doing the right thing represents that much more balm with which to assuage not only class but also ethnic anxieties.

This week brought two such cases, spanning the North American continent from sea to shining sea, and the heroes in both cases are desi: Indian taxi driver Vinod Mago from Lynnwood, near Seattle, who returned a customer’s wallet with $5,950 in cash, and Bangladeshi driver Osman Chowdhury (pictured) here in New York, whose customer, a jeweler from Dallas, left a suitcase that was found to contain 31 diamond rings rings.

As you may have read, the Chowdhury story comes with the additional piquant detail that the Dallas lady had tipped him only 30 cents on a $10.70 fare. So in the end her misadventure only ended up costing her $100.30, as she gave Chowdhury a C-note as his reward. (Though he initially refused any reward at all, and it may be that he was only prepared to accept the equivalent of fares he lost while dealing with the situation, which of course would make her a bit less of a tightwad and him even more of a saint.)

Here’s a snapshot of Chowdhury’s life according to a BBC report:

Back home in Bangladesh he used to work as a contractor. He is still unmarried, but lost his parents recently and has to provide for his family which includes many sisters.

He does not even own a cab, but rents it for 12 hour shifts.

The job is so stressful that it has affected his health. He suffers from high blood pressure, and kidney problems.

“But I have always maintained that no matter what the problems we face in life, we should not resort to dishonesty,” he said.

And here’s Vinod Mago’s similar comment, from an AP report:

“If money doesn’t belong to me, I don’t keep it,” Mago said. “I know God is watching everybody, every second.”

Wise statements on the part of both brothers, of course, though I don’t think too many tears would have been in order had the 30-cent tipper somehow lost her diamonds for good; I suppose you can make the karmic argument either way. But I especially liked this comment on a Bangladeshi blog, which relayed another quote from Osman and added a topical barb:

This is what he had to say about the incident: “All my life, I tried to be honest, …today is no different…. I’m not going to take someone else’s money or property to make me rich. I don’t want it that way.”

IsnÂ’t it interesting that the majority of the elected officials in Bangladesh think exactly the opposite way, and think they can loot public money just because they can. I hope Osman Chowdhury will go back to Bangladesh, and run for a seat in the parliament in the next election. Bangladesh desperately needs people like Osman in the Shangshad and in the PMÂ’s cabinet.

To which one commenter offered the obviousreply:

It is quite possibly because he IS an honest man that he chose to drive a cab in NYC rather than enter BD politics.

61 thoughts on “Honest Injuns”

  1. Still doesn’t detract from the fact that it is derogatory to Native Americans.

    it’s not derogitory to native americans. it’s detogitory to the white majority

  2. I wish that Osman Chowdhury will be back to his native country, and carry on hi activities and seat in the parliament for the next election. Bangladesh desperately needs people like Osman in the Nation-Shangshad and in the PMÂ’s cabinet.

  3. Siddhartha:

    In Shruti’s words, that you endorse, “The use of the term “honest Injun” in the title prompts a comparison with the historical use of that term”. If you wanted to lead with offensive expressions, I think the term “mighty white of him” would have worked much better. Lets face it. The article was about a Bangladeshi cabbie (not withstanding your efforts to put the Indian cabbie into the story) and the story is about a non-white, who did the right thing.

    Divya’s “Political correctness for the sake of political correctness is a hundred times worse than any imagined insult to any community, imo.” comment and Manju’s “offensive to the white majority” comment, don’t make sense to me and I will leave it at that.

    Not to flog a dead horse (too late!), but in my opinion, leading the article by using terms that others found offensive did distract your readers. Then that became the story. The current WaPo.com, William Arkin “mercenary” brouhaha comes to mind. In this case, I assume that is not what you wanted. That was my point.

  4. well simply put they are idiots. America is land of opportunity no? lolz

    itz like the idiot that catched the baseball that he cud sell for millions and ppl were saying the rite thing to do was give it back to the player. oh plzzzzz what stupidity. ppl need to make logical decisions wid their head as opposed to emotional decisons based on the heart. yes they get their 15mins but is it really worth it? hmmm i think noT.

  5. JayV plzzzz do not be extreme. you are not flogging a dead horse but one that’s already buried!

  6. Manju’s “offensive to the white majority” comment, don’t make sense to me and I will leave it at that.

    i read “honest injuns” as a statement on the attitude of the white majority, ie, subtle racism and condecension toward injuns masquerading as praise. in other words, it was a subtle derogitory jab at whites.

    of course, i only saw praise for an individual in the reporting, as the stereotype siddhartha refers to, is not applicable at all, as far as i know, to indian immigrants.

    i would like to praise siddhartha and shruti for being so “articulate”, but i’m afraid they may take offense.

  9. I understand why the phrase “honest injun” was appropriate in the this context and I’m familiar with its non-deragotory use (and now history) but I view this as analogous to the confederate flag. Let me explain. The confederate flag did not start out as a symbol of racism but it was later hijacked by white supremacists as their own symbol. Today, the flag has different meanings to different people. It can simply be a symbol of American history or it can be a scary symbol of racism.

    The context is extremely important. If the confedarate flag is hanging in the American History Museum in DC, it’s pretty clear that the context is non-offensive. If the flag is displayed on someone’s car, it’s ambiguous. So, when using symbols or phrases with multiple meanings, one walks a fine line that is dependent on making the context abundantly clear. Siddartha probably thought the context was abundantly clear. That said, even if the phrase “honest injun” has a neutral history, the word “injun” does not and for that reason it may be best to banish the phrase from use.