Via SAJAForum, an…interesting political cartoon by Ted Rall which experiments with a provocative question: what if Republican threat to everything presidential candidate Mike Huckabee were a different sort of fundamentalist?
Here are the cartoonist’s own words regarding this work, from his blog:
Today’s cartoon responds to the generally respectful tone accorded Mike Huckabee, who does not believe in evolution and is therefore, by definition, a lunatic. [vague link]
I do appreciate Rall’s overarching point– Huckabee is allowed to be as batshit crazy as he wants to be because he’s on the fundamentalist fringe of my religion instead of any other one– since I’m no fan of the preacher man. It’s a very valid concern.However, I also cringed slightly at how Rall made his point. I cynically wonder whether people will get mired in “Hinduism is strange” instead of questioning why we aren’t more worried about the rise of this candidate. After all, if Rall’s conception of Hindu fundamentalism (cobras? chanting? SATI??) confuses slightly-familiar-with-Hinduism-me, what will those with even less exposure to the religion think?
And if you are Hindu (as I think a majority of our readers are), are you offended by this cartoon?
Well, what is it (if not a figment of your imagination)? An example of such objectivity if it exists would help.
New Delhi, Manali, Goa, are full of Israelis
Those are three cities, in the entire country, Id like to know what percentage constitutes “full of israelis”
lots of peeps from Jewish background.
but once they assert themselves in these organisations, they are no longer Jewish, culturally or religiously.
In any event, white American Jews on the whole really don’t “respect” non-Abrahamic faiths any more than Xtians and Muslims, rather they just don’t make a point to remind you you’re final destination of being eternally barbecued.
I’m talking about textbooks used in schools referring to things like the Mahabharata and Ramayana as ‘myths’; instead of that, referring to them as ‘epics’ would be much better. That’s one example. I’m not going to continue this discussion with you anymore, you continue to accuse anyone who doesn’t agree with your argument of being a fundamentalist or of being hopelessly deluded.
I would appreciate in that case if you didn’t do that in the third person either. Btw, I thought you were rude first (#188 and 189). Considering that this whole thing was in response to the question “What is hindu fundamentalism” and my whole argument is that it is delusional of hindus to think their religion can be respected by making it all true, your comment does not sound fair.
199 International hindu/yoga orgs are ISKCON, Gaudiya Math, Osho’s org, Shivananda’s org, Integral Yoga, Yoga Amrit Desai’s org, Yogi Bhajan’s org, and the hundreds of others….. lots of peeps from Jewish background.
I would be very surprised if people of the Judaic faith went to Osho’s organization(more like a cult). I know what I going to say will be very controversial but I am puzzled myself. Sorry to say this and I don’t want to hurt people’s feelings and beliefs, but Osho (before he passed away due to AIDS) or Bhagavan Rajneesh said anti Semitic jokes. He also made his followers poison the salad bar of an Oregon restaurant. Maybe the Osho organization has changed but I would beware of anything to do with that group. Simply Google OSHO and Bhagavan Rajneesh and you might find a laundry list of unsavory items. The other groups mentioned seem innocent. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Maybe the Osho group (like most Hindu organizations) may have some great ideas and service to the poor, etc. However, the origins of this group are a bit suspicious. I feel groups like this set Indians and legitamite Hindus back. (Most of you may be too young to remember Oregon’s “Bag the Bhagvan” movement.)
Personally, anytime a person says something anti Semitic, I would stay far away from them and I would question their sanity.
anytime a person says something anti Semitic
I would hope you’d stay far away from them and question their sanity if they said anything anti-[enter ethnicity here],
unless you suggest anti-semitism is worse then insulting other groups. Of course, the word semitic used to describe jewish is itself a misnomer, as it’s a linguistic stock, including arabic. Hence, arabs are semites, and much of the anti-arabic diatribe coming out of israel is itself, anti-semitic.
In response to HMF #206. Of course, I hate anything that is offensive and degrading to ANY ethnic/racial/gender/etc. group. And I always knew that Semites include Arabic people, Jewish people, etc.
That wasn’t clear from your original message, then given that knowledge, isn’t using the word ‘anti-semitic’ to represent anti-jewish sentiments, actually quite wrong?
This is the true fundamentalist conception of a religion. Or as people in the judiciary call it, “taking a strict constructionist approach”.
the idea that “all religions are respect worthy” is a noble lie, a necessary evil as plato infomed us designed to keep the savages from killing each other. some subjects, like IQ for example, should be off limits to regular people, and perhaps even some non-regulars like james watson. now, i hereby declare that only camille and razib are allowed to speak of religion. the rest of you, kindly stfu. you’re not worthy.
No, using the word “anti-semitic” to represent anti Jewish sentiment is not wrong.
The term Semite can refer to people (and languages) of Arabic AND Jewish origins as well as some other cultural groups in and around the mideast from what I understand.
Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic
and http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/semitic (an online version of the Merriam-Webster dictionary).
No, using the word “anti-semitic” to represent anti Jewish sentiment is not wrong.
I meant exclusively, to represent Jewish-targetted diatribe. because in 99.99% of the instances, thats what it’s used to represent. For example, if an arab criticizes isreal, it’s deemed anti-semitic, but from that word alone, he could be insulting himself, as he is a semite. I’m saying, if you mean anti-jewish, why not say anti-jewish?
Bess, re
I did not view your comments as glib – on the contrary, I thought your comment about being “precocious” was mildly flattering and certainly nostalgic since it brought back memories of my mother’s defense of yours truly during my childhood!:)
The extension of this would be that anyone can pick and choose fundamental tenets of any faith and yet claim to be an adherent to that faith. Even I, with my liberal view of this and other issues, find that a bit of a stretch. I really don’t need validation of my beliefs but I will not quarrel – nor take offense – at any Christian who suggests that my rejection/modification of certain fundamental tenets of Christianity makes my claim to be a Christian dubious. To have a doctrinaire belief in any religion requires total faith. I have a certain admiration for those who can do this, although it does require a certain level of intellectual detachment to reach that point – something that it is unlikely I will ever be able to accomplish.
Camille,
If the central tenet of a religion is that it is the only “true” faith, can it then be said that it holds “respect for other religions”? If so, then it is a rather dubious form of “respect”. I am not just singling out Christianity in this regard.
I specifed from within religions. Because they are so belief-centric. I agree there are more enlightened ways to look at this but they mostly have to do with common sense, not so easily to be found when it comes to matters religious.
This thread is among the most intelligent discussions SM has ever hosted. I learned a lot from Divya, Nala, Camille, Meera ke Prabhu, notsoyoungdesi and some others. To make it even better, personal assaults were minimal to non-existent, SM Intern didn’t have to step in even once, commenters stayed on the topic and a good time was had by all. Keep up the great work, people.
I assume many of you have read “Holy Cow” by Sarah McDonald.
http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Cow-Adventure-Sarah-Macdonald/dp/0767915747
HMF@202:
Not trying to quantify percentages here, but what Meera ke Prabhu said seems to be right in spirit: Haaretz and YNetNews.
Beyond that, I state no opinion on the topic.
notsoyoungdesi, if you look outside the “Abrahamanic” religions several religions make no claim to be the only “true” faith or path, thus respect is not incompatible. Buddhism and Sikhi are immediate examples.
S’ok 🙂 I appreciate the conversation — I think we just had our wires crossed a little.
Also, notsoyoungdesi, I thought about your question, and I would even extend my argument to Abrahamanic religions. While there are certainly a large number of Muslims and Christians (perhaps even the majority or a supermajority within their faith communities) who believe that their religion is the only true or valid faith, I might many who do not believe this and who hold respect for other faiths. I wonder if, through dialogue and a vested interest in interfaith communication, this idea of religious supremacy breaks down. I’m not that hopeful, but I do think some people dismiss this interpretation of their faiths the same way they dismiss the completely obsolete rules in Leviticus.
Not trying to quantify percentages here, but what Meera ke Prabhu said seems to be right in spirit: Haaretz and YNetNews
Its funny, these two articles if anything, contravene meera’s point of Israeli respect for India and Hinduism. I mean, it makes no statement on the respect or lack-there-of for the religion, but makes strong points on cultural respect. I met someone who lived in Israel for 5 years (a south asian) and described it as the 51st state of USA.
Either way, even if Israelis backpack through India – doesn’t say anything about the level of ‘respect’ they have for Hinduism, and certainly white american jews are no more or less disproportionately respectful to it, as it is a non-Abrahamic faith.
210 · Manju said
Manju are you like a global Admin at Sepia Munity or something?
205· gm said
208· HMF said
211· gm said
HMF, it seems your attempts at nickel-and-dime dialectic are missing the point and in the process you may be shooting yourself in the foot. 😉 When GM clearly established that your comment (refering to anti-Jewish sentiment as anti-Semitic sentiment is “actually quite wrong”) is, ironically, actually quite wrong 🙂 and you admit as much by squirming sideways to:
212· HMF said
I don’t recall GM claiming he/she was addressing Jews exclusively? And even if he/she were, how does it matter, when GM’s substantive point is crystal clear – that he/she does not support ethnic hate? How does a pissing contest contribute to the dialog, or help establish your credibility?
Here’s another part of this thread where you attempt the constructionist approach, and ended up dissing yourself:
196 · HMF said
I dont live there so I don’t know, but in the times I’ve visited, I haven’t seen any Israelis. My experience is limited to white American Jews, none of which have taken a disproportionate interest in Hinduism.
202 · HMF said
Those are three cities, in the entire country, Id like to know what percentage constitutes “full of israelis” lots of peeps from Jewish background. but once they assert themselves in these organisations, they are no longer Jewish, culturally or religiously. In any event, white American Jews on the whole really don’t “respect” non-Abrahamic faiths any more than Xtians and Muslims, rather they just don’t make a point to remind you you’re final destination of being eternally barbecued.
While Meera Ke Prabhu is clearly narrating his/her personal anecdotal experience of the Israeli tourist/soldier-hippie brigade(yes this demographic really does exist in Israel!) in India, you first tell MkP he/she is wrong, then accuse him/her of extrapolating from three cities to a country, ask for percentages to support the anecdotes…but it gets better!
Next you proceed to conflate Judaism with American Jews you have met, build your world-view of Judaeo-Hindu relations based on these encounters, throw Jewish students of Bikram yoga out of the religion since they are now pagans, and then perform the most nonsensical reductionism yet on this thread – “white American Jews on the whole really don’t “respect” non-Abrahamic faiths any more than Xtians and Muslims”!! Uhhh…let’s see, I’d like to see some percentages to support that brilliant induction 😉
My point – this forum is meant for exploration. Clearly you are exploring your understanding of logic and elenchos. Let others explore their take on theology and tourism! For instance, see my exploration of the limits of run-on sentences above 😀 All with good humor and blogvibes transmitted!
221 · lion said
I’m a Sepia Mutiny Deity. Criticism of me is therefore out-of-bounds.
Amen to Harlem Sun! (#222)
196 · HMF said
PS: How exactly did you look for Israelis in your extensive India travels, did you spot the star of Davids tattoed on their foreheads? 😉
So what say you, O Divine Lord Manju, on the matter of what makes a religion worthy of respect?
Manju ki Jai!
223 · Manju said
We’re all Avatars in Hinduism, got to love the polytheistic aspect of the religion.
226 · nala said
religion should not be an opiate of the people, just allow the people to smoke opium
so you’re saying that no religion is worthy of respect? i’d agree with you, but that’s not going to happen, so i don’t see what your point has to do with the issue of trying to be objective when it comes to teaching about different religions.
Manju, in your vision of the ideal world (one withour religion), would it look anything like this?
Next you proceed to conflate Judaism with American Jews you have met,
No I don’t. Maybe you should learn to read as well as write.
In post #196, i write: “My experience is limited to white American Jews”
The context of my qualification was in fact to ensure I don’t conflate it with the entire judea faith, rather just qualify them to white american jews that I have come across with (and I lived in a heavily jewish population, all members of ‘white flight’)
Uhhh…let’s see, I’d like to see some percentages to support that brilliant induction 😉
aha. your true stupidity rears its head. isn’t it obvious that’s a editorial comment? Especially taken in conjunction with my original statement, “my experience is limited…”
Where as to state “Israelis are all over India” is an objective, non-opiniated statement, easily verifiable. (or at least easier)
HMF, it seems your attempts at nickel-and-dime dialectic are missing the point
How is this nickel and Diming, I agree it’s tangential to the central point. but do you have an answer to the question? and of course, the answer is no.
Clearly you are exploring your understanding of logic
clearly you are in need of some logic exploration yourself.
process you may be shooting yourself in the foot
If I’m shooting myself in the foot, you have clearly blown yours off with an RPG.
nala:
my only serious point on this thread is that rall cartoon reads, at least if one is not familiar with ralls work, as a defense of huckabee…ie a request that the left accord fundamentalist christians the same cultural sensitivity that they accord non-christian fundamentalists. there is a growing movement, as evident by a recent UN resolution, to suppress ant-religious speech as hate speech, which necessitates a double standard depending on the perceived power of the religion.
for example, the recent squabble over the term islamofascism where the very people who use the term in its most colloquial (meaning right-wing authoritianism) and all-encompassing way (bush as fascist, christian conservatives as fascist) are suddenly up in arms when the term is applied to OBL or the Taliban.
but rall seems to be completely unaware of this phenomenon, reminding me of fox news commentators who complain that the MSM doesn’t cover this or that, completely oblivious to the fact that they contradict themselves in the very moment they complain.
Camille, the Abrahamic religions comprise over one half of the world’s population and given this, the varying levels of rigidity that these religions embrace as being the “true” faiths argue against being respectful of other religions. I don’t know what percentage of the adherents of these religions take the more encompassing view that you referred to in your posting.
Hinduism and its variants are among the most tolerant of faiths – except for the Hindu fundamentalists who in some respects are not dissimilar to fundamentalists of the Abrahamic religions. But then, I have known Hindus who describe Hinduism as more a philosophy than a religion.
I attend a church in the US that is very liberal in its approach and makes serious efforts to encourage interfaith dialogue. However, I am less than optimistic that this can become the norm. Besides, despite the generally inclusive aspect of this church, I would suspect if you asked members of the congregation, most would probably maintain that the route to salvation is through Christianity.
The evangelical movement – which is the most rigid in its doctrines – has made and is making serious inroads in terms of conversions in many parts of the world and especially Latin America. Depending on the source one relies on, it is said that Islam – another faith that is rigid – is now the fastest growing religion in the world by virtue of conversions and a higher birth rate.
Is it the need for “moral certitude” in the context of the rigidity that provides the appeal of evangelical Christianity and Islam?
because it doesn’t exist? i actually agree with you that some people are more likely to give islam a pass in a way they wouldn’t for christianity (in fact they go all out and mock it), but i don’t really see this with hinduism. i think you’re hanging with too many ‘oh my god i love indian culture, chicken tikka masala is so tasty, i live off my trust fund and barely work and ironically wear che guevara t-shirts while having an alanis morrisette-level understanding of irony’ types.
well, hinduism is sort-off off the radar here in america, and islam a better example, as the recent UN resolution singles out islam for protection from criticism. But allan bloom, in the closing of the American mind, asks his students (u of chic) what they would do about sati if they were British administrators. all they could respond is that the British shouldn’t be there in the first place. there in lies the conflict, between ant-racism and liberalism, multiculturalism and feminism.
the skiing great in telluride
and colorado is next to utah
HMF@231: How is this nickel and Diming, I agree it’s tangential to the central point. but do you have an answer to the question? and of course, the answer is no.
Ok, since you ask so nicely 🙂
If you agree that you went tangential to GM/MkP’s theses, you copped a plea to nickel-and-dime blather (sorry if dialectic or elenchos confused you – let’s just use debate), i.e. inconsequential debate with no material illumination on the thesis. Btw I notice you didn’t address the entire first 50% of my post, where I note how you proceeded to prove yourself wrong, by first establishing that Semites subsume Jews, and then brilliantly inquiring:
HMF@108: isn’t using the word ‘anti-semitic’ to represent anti-jewish sentiments, actually quite wrong?
Sorry, I digress. As requested, here are some examples of nickel-and-dime debate (so you can measure against the definition above):
HMF@231: isn’t it obvious that’s a editorial comment?
See I usually assume editors can use articles correctly with vowels. Probably why I missed this erudite editorial. Won’t happen again.
HMF@202: rather they just don’t make a point to remind you you’re final destination I know editors don’t confuse their contractions and their possessives, so let’s see… this sentence must mean – Jews just don’t make a point to remind you that you are the final destination? Deep.
HMF@231: The context of my qualification was in fact to ensure I don’t conflate it with the entire judea faith, rather just qualify them to white american jews that I have come across with
I’m lost…did you mean you came across the red sea with these nice suburban Jews? Btw is it true that grammar school in these “white flight” neighborhoods are excellent?
Now, some contrast. A substantive debate, not nickel-and-dime, involves a negotiation of ideas:
HMF@196: I dont live there so I don’t know, but in the times I’ve visited, I haven’t seen any Israelis. My experience is limited to white American Jews, none of which have taken a disproportionate interest in Hinduism.
Ah those friendly Jews you came across with. My observation is that “white American Jews” are frequently not Israeli. And that Israeli soldier-hippie-tourists in India — the demographic under discussion by MkP — frequently forget to doff their yarmulkes and sing hava nagila on the streets of Goa and Manali. It seems that MkP has some anecdotal experience indicating that Israeli Jews have an interest in the mechanics of Hinduism. Just because tourists in India can’t spot them doesn’t appear to contra-indicate this. I’d be interested in learning more MkP.
HMF@202: but once they assert themselves in these organisations, they are no longer Jewish, culturally or religiously. In any event, white American Jews on the whole really don’t “respect” non-Abrahamic faiths any more than Xtians and Muslims, rather they just don’t make a point to remind you you’re final destination of being eternally barbecued.
Isn’t this a circular argument? If an Israeli Jew shows interest in Hindu philosophy or practice, then by your (lack of) logic he or she is no longer a Jew, so they cannot be counted as Jewish interested parties in Hinduism? Ergo no Jew can ever be counted as a student of Hinduism – a tautology. Btw, my personal experience of “white American Jews” and their levels of interest in Hinduism and Buddhism is exactly opposite yours, but that is just one data point. I would defer to MkP and gm since they have real-world experience. Don’t be staying up all night with that thesaurus now 😉 G’night!
proceeded to prove yourself wrong, by first establishing that Semites subsume Jews, and then brilliantly inquiring:
And then I brilliantly clarified, I meant in an exclusive sense, because practically speaking. . that’s what is done. How many times have you heard semite or semitic to be used to describe arabic peoples, other than when someone is making a point that it does indeed include them?
See I usually assume editors can use articles correctly with vowels.
interesting tactic, can’t answer the point. so “nickel and dime” on the grammar.
Btw is it true that grammar school in these
oh this is much too much. i can’t wait for the actual response.
Just because tourists in India can’t spot them doesn’t appear to contra-indicate this
I never said it did, but it doesn’t support it either, in fact, I said, “if anything it contravene’s it”
If an Israeli Jew shows interest in Hindu philosophy or practice
Not interest, try reading the actual quotes you pull. I said “assert themselves” this clearly implies something stronger than just “showing interest”
Don’t be staying up all night with that thesaurus now
Maybe when you stop cramming for the next grammar bee, you could take some time to understand two things:
This is a blog, not a college entrance exam, so if such a language maven as yourself could find it in his heart to read and understand the actual statements being made and not be clouded by those pesky grammatical errors, it would be great.
wouldn’t I be staying up with a dictionary over a thesaurus?
Btw, my personal experience of “white American Jews” and their levels of interest in Hinduism and Buddhism is exactly opposite yours,
So your contention is that white american jews (why put this in quotes, the group actually does exist believe it or not) show disproportionate interest in Hinduism and Buddhism? Do you honestly believe its representative of the entire country? It makes much more intuitive sense the other way around, because what would prompt a Jew (who have collectively made efforts to preserve their own traditions) to go out of the way to show interest in other religions.
Maybe you can provide where this data set is geographically located.
notsoyoungdesi, about the rise of evangelical Christianity, I think it has to do with its “moral certitude” and if you’ve been to a service, it’s a cathartic experience. It doesn’t require much intellectually. Emotionally it can be satisfying to many who were brought up in a religion that is more ritualistic, intellectual and distant. You mentioned Latin America. I’ve heard the same that more and more Catholics there are becoming evangelical Christians, I think it’s because they seek a religion that feels more intimate/personal and on some level cathartic. It’s growing in the U.S. as well and I sometimes wonder if it’s because it fits so nicely into our consumer culture mentality of immediacy: instant salvation, instant path, instant “moral certitude” and its fun!
I also want to add, notsoyoungdesi, that a religion with “moral certitude” can be seen as a comfort to those with a sense of dislocation by modernity. The “old time religion” makes life more familiar.
Are you referring to this one?
What makes you think its hubris or righteousness? “Sanity” might be more appropriate. Its just that some people don’t go out of their way to not offend others. Overcoming bias is a nice blog with very meaningful and well thought out posts with an unusually high intellectual content.
Let me clarify.
In India many Israeli jews participate in Hindu culture and yoga organizations.
In the west, several of the many yoga organizations have many, many members from western jewish backgrounds. They do not neccessarily give up all aspects of their jewish cultural heritage even after taking “initiation” into a hindu, yogic school of thought.
Read “The Jew in the Lotus”.
If you roam amongst some of the major yoga orgs just here in USA you might meet with more people of a jewish background than a christian one. That has been my experience with several of them.
The Israeli youths in India have created their own sort of sub-culture and network. They have built a few communities there, they are quite active and organized in Goa, often bringing rabbis over from Israeli to start schools and synagougs, but also remaining very open to some aspects of hinduism, such as meditational techniques and yoga.
It is argued that the open nature of Judaism permits this. One rabbi even argues that you can be an atheist and a jew at the same time without any conflict. Of course their are jews that disagree with that view.
Manju, are you joking? (re: a “defense” of Huckabee? Really!?)
notsoyoungdesi, I understand and agree — I think this argument over what is “true” undermines a lot of efforts to the other. As I mentioned in my post, I’m sure the number of adherents of those religions who have a more encompassing view is in the vast minority. My only point in contesting Divya’s explanation is that it does not hold for all religions, and it certainly does not hold everywhere.
If you roam amongst some of the major yoga orgs just here in USA you might meet with more people of a jewish background than a christian one. That has been my experience with several of them.
Which major yoga orgs? where in the USA? these are very vague statements.
Coming from northern NJ (the state which has the most Jewish children), most Jews more closely identify with Xtian (and in some cases Muslim, but rare) people, rather some have shown interest in non-Abrahamic faiths, however it’s not disproportionate in any way.
I do agree though, that they are not as quick to proselytize, or convert as Xtians and muslims, however by and large from my experience, their level of “cultural identity” is fairly high, so really doesn’t make too much sense for them to reach out. (from a religious standpoint)
Q: Why did the elephant sit on an orange outside the synagogue?
A: Because he wanted to see the juice come out.
I thought that was hilarious when I heard it in fourth grade, btw.
244 · Camille said
Well, knowing Rall, I figured that’s impossible. But that’s the only way the cartoon makes sense. Partisans of all stripes often think themselves victims, oblivious to the fact that there are huge swaths of the MSM that think like them. Thus Rall thinks non-christin beliefs are routinely mocked while chistians are protected, which is true in some camps, but the complete opposite happens in others.
iABD thought so too.
Manju, please to take 2 tablets of motrin in case you incur undue bodily strain from the contortions you put yourself through in trying to impute “progressives” (or was it “liberals”) with the worst of motives.
As a fan of socialized medicine (HILLARYCARE!, will it soon be OBAMEDICATION?), I dispense this advice to you free of charge.
please to take 2 tablets of motrin
F motrin. might as well go right for the codeine.