Let me start by posting Sonal Shah’s newly-released statement in full, as one goal of this post is to let readers judge her words for themselves:
I was recently maligned by a professor at a college in Connecticut who wrote an article in CounterPunch accusing me of association with Hindu extremism. Then, a few days ago, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, former Republican Senator from Pennsylvania, published an editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer, to which this site linked, that echoed the CounterPunch accusations. These attacks sadden me, but they share one other thing in common: the accusations are false.
In reaction to these attacks, my closest friends — and many strangers — have rallied to my side. I am touched by this outpouring of support. And as painful as this episode has been for me personally, I welcome the opportunity to discuss this issue with the seriousness that it deserves, but the conversation should proceed on the basis of verified facts and reasoned argument, not innuendo and defamation.
Indian politics and history are contested and emotive, but also unfamiliar to most Americans. I understand why so many Indians and Indian-Americans feel strongly about religious extremism in India, because I share the same concerns.
I am an American, and my political engagements have always and only been American. I served as a U.S. Treasury Department official for seven years, and now work on global development policy at Google.org. And I am honored to serve on the Presidential Transition Team of President-elect Obama while on leave from Google.org.
I emigrated from India at the age of four, and grew up in Houston. Like many Americans, I remain proud of my heritage. But my engagement with India has been exclusively cultural and humanitarian. After the devastating earthquake in Gujarat in 2001, I worked on behalf of a consortium of Indian-American organizations to raise funds for humanitarian relief. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHP-A), an independent charity associated with the eponymous Indian political group, was among these organizations, and it was the only one to list my name on its website. I am not affiliated with any of these organizations, including the VHP-A, and have not worked with any of them since 2001.
The experience with the Gujarat earthquake did, however, teach me an important lesson. It pointed up a lack of dedicated infrastructure to help alleviate suffering in India, so together with my brother and sister, I founded Indicorps, an organization modeled on the U.S. Peace Corps that enables young Indian-Americans to spend a year in service to marginalized communities in India. The fellows come from every religious background, and have worked among every religious community in India. Indeed, some Indicorps fellows focus on inter-faith dialogue as part of their projects.
In 2002, Gujarat suffered one of the most profound tragedies in its long history, when extremist political leaders, including some associated with the VHP, incited riots that resulted in the deaths of thousands. Had I been able to foresee the role of the VHP in India in these heinous events, or anticipate that the VHP of America could possibly stand by silently in the face of its Indian counterpart’s complicity in the events of Gujarat in 2002 — thereby undermining the American group’s cultural and humanitarian efforts with which I was involved — I would not have associated with the VHP of America.
Sadly, CounterPunch and Senator Santorum have suggested that I somehow endorse that violence and the ongoing violence in Orissa. I do not – I deplore it. But more than that, I have worked against it, and will continue to do so. I have already denounced the groups at issue and am hopeful that we can begin to have an honest conversation about the ways immigrant and diaspora communities can engage constructively in social and humanitarian work abroad. (link)
I was happy to see a believable account of how Shah’s name appeared on the VHPA website as a coordinator for earthquake relief in 2001. Shah doesn’t specifically address the statements from a VHPA spokesman to the effect of “she was part of our leadership council for three years,” but there is a clear and convincing account of what she now believes about the VHP as an organization in India, as well as a clear statement about Gujarat 2002. I think we should also not overlook the statement “I am an American” that is here: she considers her personal political commitments to be first and foremost oriented to the American political landscape. I think this fact is important to remember whenever we talk about 2nd generation South Asian Americans’ relationships to specific political issues within South Asia.
After the fold, some thoughts following a personal meeting I had with Anand Shah, Sonal Shah’s younger brother, today in Philadelphia.
First, Anand is a pretty intense person — he had a lot to say about the work he and his siblings have done with Indicorps. What came through is a real passion for the kind of work Indicorps does, namely help people find NGOs in India that need hard-working, compassionate people who have skills that can help people all over India. I got the strong sense that Anand would infinitely prefer to be talking about his experiences on that front in India (where he has lived full time since 2002), than dealing with this attack on his sister’s reputation. (Though he is an extremely passionate defender of his sister, don’t get me wrong.)
Second, I get the sense that at least these two Shah siblings are “doers” rather than “talkers.” In our conversation today, Anand repeatedly emphasized his desire to work with people of different political stripes, if it can result in positive outcomes for people in need. He seemed especially impatient with lefty academic types in the U.S., who tend to talk a lot about poverty over dinner at pricey restaurants in New York City. He sees himself bi-partisan in the Obama vein — if a conservative wants to work with him to get something done that will have a positive impact, he’ll go there. These folks are pragmatists, not ideologues.
Third, he stressed the need for second-generation South Asian Americans (the target readership for this blog, incidentally) to take charge of our own self-representation, and not leave it to people like Vijay Prashad. Many of us have complicated affiliations that don’t fit the Indian paradigm of “hardcore religious” or “hardcore secular/Marxist.” For example, some of us have strong connections to religious identity (and associations that come with those strong connections), but nevertheless also would want to be identified as tolerant and progressive when it comes to the broader social order. (I’m thinking of my friends over at blogs like The Langar Hall, or perhaps Ali Eteraz [who has stopped blogging]. And I’m also referring to the religious youth camps that I discussed in my previous post on “Yankee Hindutva”)
Fourth, he agreed with my assessment that all this close attention to an association in Sonal Shah’s past is a bit insane given the gravity of the ongoing communal problem in India, where a person’s political and religious affiliations generally are worn on one’s sleeve. (No one needs to snoop and speculate to find out what you really think; chances are, it’s right out there in the open.)
Sonal Shah, I’ll say again, has never been heard to say anything remotely intolerant — and she’s not exactly been a shrinking violet when it comes to speaking engagements over the past few years. It’s also not clear that she ever did anything for the VHPA other than this role as an earthquake relief coordinator in 2001 (which she describes as only one part of a larger effort involving a consortium of organizations). In her own narrative of this association, as well as her brother’s account of it that I heard in person today, this was not a sustained or major involvement. Their decision to found Indicorps emerged precisely out of a need to establish a mechanism by which second generation Indian Americans could channel their desire to do good secularly, specifically where it would be of real benefit in India.
I hope there is enough evidence out there now that Sonal Shah is not some kind of ideologue for the Hindu right (in fact, she is not an ideologue at all). Moreover, her role as a member of the Obama transition team has had no involvement with policy related to India, so why exactly are we still talking about it?
It’s by the standard of Indicorps that Anand Shah wants to be judged — and I for one am willing to give him that.
100 · Desi Italiana said
I really appreciated your comment– I, too, am sick of this being unproductively framed as Vijay vs Sonal, nyah nyah nyah– and I found myself nodding along with you until that bit about the intern which I quoted above. 🙁 I know this is a frustrating, important debate, but the intern works hard to keep this crazy space somewhat civilized (and owns an autographed copy of Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting, to boot).
It read like an unfortunate jab, after such a necessary comment full of salient points.
Just wanted to second Anna’s comments — thanks, Desi Italiana, for letting some air back into this conversation. And kudos to the SM intern — who probably needs to get some shuteye around now, unless s/he’s telecommuting from Gurgaon…
I agree. But one must understand the concern. what makes people queasy about prashad is what makes others queasy about hitchens in regards to the islaofascism debate. both groups of queasy people are concerned that to engage these individuals is to further a reactionary agenda much more destructive, in their opinion, to various communities than the agenda in question…though they are mostly opposed to that agenda as well.
But at the end of the day they just end up deflecting issues.
Anna:
I didn’t mean it in a snarky way, I really was anticipating such an SM Intern intervention when I saw how long my comment was, and I’ve seen SM Intern comments asking commentators to start up their own blogs because their comments are too long. Apologies if misguided expectation came off as sarcastic or rude.
106 · Manju said
Most people on this blog have argued with Hitchens’ arguments, not what they divine about his beliefs. Somehow, however, the arguments from Sonal Shah’s supporters repeatedly veer to their deep insights into Prashad’s unreconstructed class envy.
I’m satisfied with Sonal’s account. She points out that VHP-A was just one out of a consortium of organizations that together organized the disaster relief that she participated in for victims of the Gujarat earthquake of 2001. I would hazard a guess that many of these organizations were Gujarati, although Vijay Prashad and others would have a harder time persecuting Sonal for being Gujarati.
Sonal has quietly accumulated an extraordinary professional track record with a clear engagement in green initiatives and economic development in both private and public sectors. She is currently on leave from Google.org. Her particular accomplishment with respect to her ties to India is co-founding Indicorps, of which she says, “I founded Indicorps, an organization modeled on the U.S. Peace Corps that enables young Indian-Americans to spend a year in service to marginalized communities in India. The fellows come from every religious background, and have worked among every religious community in India. Indeed, some Indicorps fellows focus on inter-faith dialogue as part of their projects.”
All the heat and vitriol generated against Sonal in some of the comments above and elsewhere arise out of a determined focus on the evils of VHP, instead of on her own work, despite her extremely tenuous connection to the events in Gujarat and VHP’s ideologies. My question is, why are some people working so hard to make the mud stick? What’s in it for them except self aggrandisement on Sonal’s back?
109 · Amrita said
i like your style. since prashad bashing has been rendered temporarily passe (although you still couldn’t resist doing some of it), you redirect your deflecting ad hominem techniques. good job. you should reread earlier comments to understand what people’s (legitimate) concerns are with the elephantine omissions and “these are not the droids you’re looking for” hand gestures in her statement.
desi italiana: some solid points there. especially about how some people think that calling somebody a marxist is an effective rebuttal or a susbtitute for substance. most desi-americans that i know aren’t faintly acquainted with prashad. so you’re right that the broader community does not see him as their mouthpiece. and i doubt the MSM considers prashad a representative of the desi-american viewpoint. moreover, you’re right about the general unproductiveness of identity politics. ultimately, the ills of one organ of the body politic will affect other parts too. the problems of one set of people can be contained temporarily, but for how long? zimbabwe is bleeding but the rest of us are now engaged with terrorism; but i think it’s only a matter of time until that problem implodes.
i went to their website. i saw the links for its constitution, but i cannot access anything after the contents page. i think that will be the best source to determine the exact links of their association with vhp-i.
but is there a good reason to believe that vhp-a has financial ties to vhp-i? does it help in fundraising? if you help fund the bad guys while being aware of their agenda, you are implicated in their deeds. the degree of involvement and blame are proportional, however.
with all due respect, a lot of second generation folks reduce the complicated paradigm of indian politics to the the limited political spectrum they see in the us and elsewhere. and if we’re talking about VHP-A and its relation to the sangh parivar to discover if it is an unethical organization, it is hard not to bring up subcontinental politics. as evinced from this thread and a few others, a lot of people ignore the good works of the VHP and its Indian allies. they’re saying that sonal shah is being pulled up for being a proud hindu. i am glad that ms. shah is a proud hindu and actively invloved in serving her community. she may be just be using the vhp-a as a vehicle to propagate her charitable impulses. but did she have to be on the board of vhp-a? are there any minutes of board meetings where she asked her fellow leaders to condemn the actions of vhp-i? did she resign from the board of vhp-a after the “heinous” acts were committed? afaic, sonal shah is not still disqualified from being in the obama administration. she needs to be a little more explicit in countering the allegations. her brother says:
did she ask the vhp to stop ‘co-opting’ her or did she make a public statement disassociating herself from it after 2002? with a very promising career in philanthrophy, this could have been a major liability to her (as it is becoming now).
also, amardeep is generous with her “i am an american” statement. ok, so her political orientation is primarily the US. but when she does engage in sociopolitical work abroad, shouldn’t be as thoughtful and thorough in choosing her partner organization? it’s not as if the VHP was as pure as MSF pre-2002.
I wonder what the reactions would be for articles and blogs questioning the antecedents of Ms.Huma Abedin?
If a Prof in some US university writes a longish tract on Obama’s stance against Islamic terrorism, his transition team, his travels to Pakistan, his appointment of Mrs.Clinton, and Clinton’s ‘body woman’, and the body woman’s connections with Saudi Arabia, their family friend and guardian angel being an Al-Quaeda funder through the World Muslim League and plenty other Islamic Associations, and how Ms.Abedin is able to live way beyond her means etc etc….I am sure many posters here would jump to her defence and give her the benefit of doubt, and indulge in ad-hominem attacks on her critics.
Just because Ms.Abedin is ‘hot’ and doesn’t sweat even in 110 degrees, and OTOH poor Sonal is a 40+ woman who looks like a 50+ person?
Sorry Amrita: you’ve used the good ol’ crabs-in-the-bucket insult a few times too many for my taste. Why are you such a cheerleader for Sonal Shah? Would you like it if other people accused of being Sonal Shah’s mole on this somewhat influential board? We are taking you at your word and it would nice if you extended the same courtesy to us.
??? I thought this is just a blog-site hosted by Anna and Friends.Yet to see examples of this site ‘influencing’ people to change their ideologies.
112 · Kumar_N said
v h8 ugly people. ash rai for president. of the whole world. she doesn’t even look desi too ;)obama is a hawtttt too! is narendra modi kal penn modi’s deadbeat dad? omg, i h8 hindu fanatics. i’m never gonna watch house again. bye.. i hv 2 go 2 yoga class at the Y. i <3 young xtian boyz.
Hey, huh, Vijay Prashad can’t claim class envy– he was born into exceptional plenty– and I don’t believe he does claim that. There’s a deep insight for you!
Because she is an extraordinarily accomplished woman, portmanteau. It’s hard to organize people to do the good things she has organized and done, and harder still for a woman to acquire the expertise and clout needed to do this kind of work with so much impact. She’s cracking quite a few glass ceilings.
Ah portmanteau, missed that, didn’t catch what you meant. You and I and Rajesh will not become famous through these posts– I meant people who publish in journals, appear on talk shows, etc.
115 · NjDe$iQTpie said
wtf since when do u watch house u h8r??
n e wayz since u woke me up n got me on this msg board 4 old ass ppl, i jus wanna say that all u ppl who h8 on sonal r jus jealos. she is my cuzns freind an she is RLY nice. nice ppl don do n e thing bad like be meen to teh muzlimz n shit. so jus stop k? stop h8in bcuz u wil never ever be as gud as sonal. she iz da best judge evr on Ndn Idol!
I agree — people need to get rid of the Prashad vs. Shah dichotomies.
Prashad, albeit in his firebrand style, essentially was demanding that Shah clarify her associations with the VHP. He used it as a platform to talk about Hindutva in general. Shah did that, sorta.
I don’t see how being a leftist has anything to do with this. Yes, Prashad is on the left, but this isn’t a left issue. In fact, I think the Left would be glad to see non-leftists join them in condemning Hindutva and the like.
I don’t have any personal interest in this, but it seems like a few lessons can be learned from all this. First, a couple of datapoints:
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/uspolls2008/Election_Story.aspx?ID=NEWEN20080072540 http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/uspolls2008/Election_Story.aspx?ID=NEWEN20080076063&type=
In an interview (first link) the current general secretary of the VHP-A says that “She was just coming out of college. We were trying to get the younger generation involved in the VHP-A. So she was taken into our governing body. Then the earthquake happened in Gujarat and she worked on that.” I’m not sure how formal an organization the VHP-A was in the 1990s, but given the current general secretary’s statement that he is a friend of her father’s, and that she was coming out of college, this seems kinda like a pretty loose affiliation probably driven by family friendships more than anything else.
Given, from what I’ve read, her stellar record with Indicorps (on both service and interreligious fronts), logic would suggest that her involvement with the vhp-a was perhaps driven by family relations and a desire to combine her heritage and a desire for service. (Clearly Indicorps was a far superior manifestation of this desire). I’m not sure how much information was online and published about the political machinations of the organization and its relationship to the vhp-india at that point in time (mid-late 1990s), so it’s conceivable she just never came across it. It might have just never have occurred to her to do a bit of research into this and to simply think of it as another hindu organization in the US. In hindsight, of course, this was an error on her part, especially given her later public career. This is not to excuse any ignorance or lack of knowledge on her part. But all this together, suggests that this brouhaha is a case of innocuous ignorance, at worst.
Now, since I’m just going by what I’ve read and basic reasoning, this could be a flawed assessment; but at this point, this all seems overwrought – I’m not even sure what the end-goal of all the criticism now is (well I know what Santorum’s trying to do.. talk about mega-hypocrite). Anyhow, the lesson here for me is, obviously, to do a little digging into your involvement with any organization to make sure they do represent your values; especially if you’re planning on a career in the limelight!
I am glad that she has come out with a strong statement against the Sangh. But then her statement says:
Does anyone remember what the VHPA did in 1992-3 when the VHP and other Sangh groups destroyed the Babri Masjid and led massive anti-Muslim violence after that? Or in 1998 when the VHP led anti-Christian violence in Gujarat? The VHPA has been around since 1970. This is a serious question. Anyone?
Anyone know what the other groups were in the “consortium of Indian-American organizations” that Sonal Shah was raising money for in 2001?
There also seems to be an assumption that Sonal Shah’s ignorance somehow excuses her actions and affiliations. Following Wikipedia’s timeline, she was working for the Treasury Department at this point (2001, in her early 30s), or about to work for the Center for Global Development, in positions where one assumes she would have access to research resources, or at least newspaper archives. She is now entering a job where every decision has immense impact, where there’s no room for not doing one’s homework. As a U.S. citizen I hope that the Transition Team would appoint people that followed up on their research.
CAIR are a front organisation for the Muslim Brotherhood. I don’t find much admirable about them at all.
. Why? Were the young natives gun-shy about hooking up with VHP, since they had seen the org’s handiwork firsthand?
So, let’s see – Babri Masjid tamasha takes place in early 90s, VHP is puppet master. In 2001 – a treasury dept. assumes VHP-A leadership?
Amardeep, i don;t know in what context in met up with Mr. Shah – but did you get a chance to engage him in any kind of debate?
93 · portmanteau said
come now, if VP was making a concrete point and accusing SS of a specific action or set of actions which led to a concrete outcome, rather than moral turpitude by association, it wouldn’t be even the slightest bit appropriate to turn the spotlight back onto the accuser. He is, however, making that morality argument and prefacing it by basically saying, in the first counterpunch article, that capital/private accumulation is IRRECONCILABLE (his words) with human needs and freedom. He labels Center for American Progress fellows as fellow futile matchers of square to circle and Clinton bootlickers (i’m sure Matt Yglesias would LOVE to respond to that charge). In other words, he engages in much sly, and occasionally not so subtle, ad-hominem attacks of his own on the way to his ‘point.’ to make such a point requires that readers should ignore the fact that he is attempting to apply his very square theory to a very round world, and that this dubious intellectual exercise be premised on his apparent belief that essentially we’re all guilty.
Where are the scientists who premise their arguments on the basis of sound traveling faster than light or Neanderthals developing cuneiform language? Taking VP seriously, because you enjoyed “There Will Be Blood,” is no reason to give his theories credence or to attribute the US attitude to child labor as somehow a result if only Sinclair’s agitations.
come now, if VP was making a concrete point and accusing SS of a specific action or set of actions which led to a concrete outcome, rather than moral turpitude by association, it wouldn’t be even the slightest bit appropriate to turn the spotlight back onto the accuser. He is, however, making that morality argument and prefacing it by basically saying, in the first counterpunch article, that capital/private accumulation is IRRECONCILABLE (his words) with human needs and freedom. He labels Center for American Progress fellows as fellow futile matchers of square to circle and Clinton bootlickers (i’m sure Matt Yglesias would LOVE to respond to that charge). In other words, he engages in much sly, and occasionally not so subtle, ad-hominem attacks of his own on the way to his ‘point.’ to make such a point requires that readers should ignore the fact that he is attempting to apply his very square theory to a very round world, and that this dubious intellectual exercise be premised on his apparent belief that essentially we’re all guilty.
Nayagan, I’m going to frame that. Perfect.
109 · Amrita said
jamaat ud dawa
The VHP is not a substitute for, or a unifying voice for, Hindu religious institutions. Again, I think the conflation of the organization with a broader, much more diverse community, is problematic. They are not the same kind of organization as CAIR, for example.
he..he.. CAIR I heard is an un-indicted co-conspirator in a terrorism funding case. that’s right. VHP is not like CAIR.
vidence, please? I am in VHP-A. And I don’t recall any incitment to communal violence in India happening.
🙂
Amardeep, i don;t know in what context in met up with Mr. Shah – but did you get a chance to engage him in any kind of debate?
Neale, I chose not to take a confrontational route. I didn’t “debate” him, because he, and Sonal Shah, and I, agree that communalism is a cancer in Indian society, which needs to be vigorously challenged. On that front there is really nothing to debate.
If what you’re asking is, “did you grill him aggressively over his and his family’s associations?” no, I did not do that. I did ask some specific questions regarding some of the most hot-button issues here, but much of what he told me in response was off the record. On the VHPA association his basic point was that Sonal did not really do very much for them; she was there as the daughter of one of the leadership, and as a token youth presence in an organization that, at the time, was overwhelmingly comprised of older folks (our parents’ generation, basically). His characterizations of the VHPA in the 1990s was as a group comprised of old blowhards who talk a lot, but didn’t really do much. I have not checked or confirmed that (again, we have to make a distinction between the VHPA and the active VHP in India, which certainly did more than just talk).
Message to rob:
As a fellow HIndutvadi, what’s the point in discussing the same stuff again and again.
The debate will be like,
anti-rob: you are Hindutvadi, you want to retain your culture and associate yourself with people who don’t subscribe to Leftist view of “secular Hinduism” and are proud to call yourself a Hindu. you are a terrorist.
rob: No, I just want to hang out with a group of people who share my stories.
anti-rob: No, no you are a terrorist.
rob: Ok, so what i am a terrorist. It is not like you are any better. If I am a Hindutva terrorist, you are either a leftist terrorist (or one who claims to follow left’s “secular Hinduism”, whatever that means) or an al-qaeda terrorist.
end of arguments.
123 · Amardeep said
Good idea. That will make you a doer.
98 · Desi Italiana said
How sensitive. The reverse: As I have been reading the virus-like posts on Sonal Shah of which the sources are Vijay Prashad, I can’t help but feel that Shah — whether you agree with her views or not — has become the punching bag for this entire Hindutva discussion and the perfect excuse for deflecting issues that could engaged with in a meaningful way –.
Since Prashad started it, he has to be willing to take it, that is owning up to the responsibility of attacking someone else. Lost in all of this: the meaningful discussion that might enrich our understanding of these issues.
I, personally, have always found the time-travel argument a winner. However, the track record of the VHP since at least the late 80s – something Sonal Shah should have been aware of, given her family’s decades-long, and continuing, association with the Sangh – and the fact that the VHP-A had been, what’s the phrase, oh yes, standing by silently, all through that period, does put a rip in the space-time continuum that will prove a challenge even for Marty McFly and Doc Brown. The real-life equivalent to the souped up Delorean’s deus ex machina seems to be a belief in Sonal Shah’s magically unsullied innocence that made her completely unaware of the existence of bad, bad people, and I think it would be absolutely cruel to her, at the age of over 40, to forcefully break her cocoon, and insert her into a world clearly much more evil than she encountered even in her international outreach efforts under Clinton in the 90s. I implore all of you, KEEP SONAL SHAH INNOCENT!
had i known then what iknow now’
Rajesh, stick to one handle on a given thread. Jumping handles as you have been doing is considered rude. In the past we have banned people for doing it.
131 · SM Intern said
sorry.
Port, I know that many of “my boyz” are campaigning against cow-slaughter, but I’m just trying to emphasize the “diversity” of the VHP-A (i.e., I eat beef) so that hopefully Camille will feel guilted into supporting us, instead of just shilling for CAIR. 😉
Can you hook me up with them?
I cannot for the life of me figure out why some people have so much difficulty understanding that it is not only politically correct but also necessary for every
Indian-AmericanSouth Asian American to hold anyone who declares to be a Hindu to higher standard. It is a necessary cog in the overall process of establishing identity.How can she join a group right after college without knowing EVERYTHING about it and predict the future…she should’ve done something better with her time, like travel to Malaysia and attend a Madrassa
RahulD
That’s right. A couple of years back, Hinduism was treated to a much harsher standard in the textbooks of California when all the “progressives” got angry about the treatment of women in ancient Hinduism and the attempt to whitewash it by the Hindutvadis. Never mind how women are treated in all religions and whether they get a pass in the textbooks. Even in the US, women got voting rights only in 1920 and in Britain the wedding age was raised from 11 only in 1928. 🙂
But Hindus MUST follow “secular Hinduism” as prescribed by the Leftists in US. Otherwise they are Hindutva terrorists.
liberal
the reason the VHP and Bajrang Dal are not banned is because Hindus are a big voting bloc, and no government has the spine to do what is necessary. you can take refuge in delusional statements about being persecuted for being a non-commie hindu if that gives you comfort, however. people who defend the vhp are no better than those who defend abortion clinic bombers or muslim riot mobs that burn buildings for cartoons, or engage in far far worse.
First of all Hindus are not a big voting bloc (they vote for Congress, Left, BJP, etc.). and the subset who are direct members of VHP is small except in some areas. They’ll need to start setting of bombs in public places and adopt mayhem as a corporate strategy. Religious riots have traditionally occured in specific areas (why ahmedabad and not so much baroda); why are tensions in oriya tribals high and incidents they are expected to recur? (hint: violence is not new to these parts) Examine the underlying reasons. Riots in these places have had a history of over 100 years. They predated VHP, Modi etc.
After Akshardham (a terror attack inside a famous TEMPLE in Modi ruled Gujarat) : NO riots After Ahmedabad Bombings: NO riots After Hyderabad Bombings: NO riots After India’s 9/11 : NO riots
An absence of an event should be as informative. Do you see a trend? If Modi, VHP believed that violence and mayhem against muslims is the best solution, how come these (and other) events did not see see any such violence. If there is tremendous discrimination against Muslims in Gujarat, we should see an exodus (just as we saw an exodus of Hindu Bangladeshis out of Muslim Bangladesh or Hindu Kashmiris out of Kashmir; of course the 20% Hindus in Pakistan during partition is now 2%)
If the VHP/Bajrang Dal and the rest had an agenda to kill/hurt minority muslims, they could have used these opportunities. If these organizations are radicalized to the extent of Jammat Ud Dawa, they should be conducting military style training (helped using military facilities) obtaining funding for these projects and implementing them. There is no such evidence. If there was such evidence, they would rapidly loss what following they do have and they would be banned and hunted down like animals (recall Veerappan).
The Naxalites (maoists) who are nominally Hindu do have a violent class based ideology and have a presence in hundreds of districts. If I am not wrong, they are banned until they denounce their violent approach and join the political process.
1947 Partition was based on the idea of a need for a Muslim homeland perceived by Muslim leaders (not all of them). The numbers killed in these riots dwarves everything else, before or since (as far as riots go). After is the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi following IGs assasination by her Sikh bodyguards. Rajiv and the local govt failed to deal with it. Exactly what Modi is being accused of with respect to Guj 2002.
So what is the VHP about? They are mainly an attempt at providing an umbrella organization for hundreds of Hindu sects (that operate independently) and find a way to project “Hindu” identity. It appears that they have chosen a strange way of doing this.. By christianizing Hindu ethos (ie. Ram Jamnabhoomi, Ram Setu etc) they put at the core of their agenda, restoring the historical associations of characters in the purana with geographical places in India. I have no idea of how big the VHP is or even if they have much influence over the common agenda. What they have unleashed is a barrage of bad PR that makes it challenging for those who may wish to project a positive Hindu identity without endorsing the VHP agenda (as above). In essence, proclaiming oneself as a ideological Hindu sets up an accusation of being on the path to full blown fascism. Hopefully the next generation of Hindu Leaders will revamp the public face of the VHP-A and make them more acceptable to various Hindu sects. ,
If one wants to put the Hindu-Muslim problem in a nutshell it is this; During 300 to 1100 CE, there was a vast flowering of civilization (Hindu) in India, in the arts, culture, science, and technology. From 1100-1750 CE, waves of Islamic conquerors indulged, at various times, in wholesale cultural and human genocide involving millions of Hindus. Few temples of antiquity are thus seen in North India (all demolished and/or replaced by Mosques). The Mughals did patronize fine art and architecture at the end of this period but could not bring modern thinking (enlightenment) and science to India.
Muslims (who are mostly Hindu converts or mixtures of persians and locals) find it easy to associate with the era post 1100. Pakistan’s missiles are named after Ghazni, the man who plundered Indias wealthiest temples and massacred tens of thousands temple employees and users. In the mind of Pakistanis, Hindus are weak, and conquering them is our right. So their textbooks are filled with hate. No wonder even common Pakistanis are susceptible to be sympathetic to notions that what was once theirs (Greater India) should be a project of the future. And is subscribed to in detail by the leaders of social movements like the LeT (the fact that it is consistent with the idea of an Islamic Caliphate doesnt hurt).
Hindus see this period very differently and choose to see the pre-islamic period as the “golden” era. Islamic conquerors imposed a religion, killed millions, destroyed extant culture, in their eyes. This is the type of understanding that leads to the demolition of the ancient Babur Mosque in Ayodhya. From the Hindu viewpoint (if I recall) it was this: Give us 3 of our ancient temples back (Ayodhya, Mathura, and Varanasi).. In each case the Mosque was built from the temple stones and we’ll call it quits. There were lots of discussions in the late 80s and early 90s and the muslim leadership did not want to accede (3 of a total of perhaps 1000s of temples that were levelled).
If the two sets of ideas are essentially incompatible, then its hard to see how modern India could work. But for the most part it has, with no fewer than 150 muslims (and a much larger part of this group, in comparison to their Pakistani counterparts) have lower caste backgrounds. We are told that the flavor of Indian Islam is much more syncretic (less Arabic).. perhaps this is a reason.
Alternatively (to the VHP), there are other umbrella groups (I think) that focus more on education (developing materials for the teaching of Hindu History). They have chapters for the ancient and the 300-1100 era.. It will be interesting how they package the Muslim era. http://hinduismtoday.com/education/
As she is going to work in an Obama administration, its only appropriate that she threw VHP-A under the bus.
133 · GallopingGranny said
Ok, for those who seem to suffer from selective amnesia: (a) She didn’t just join a group and it wasn’t just after college. She was part of the leadership team when she was close to 30. (b) She didn’t need to predict the future, unless she was miraculously expecting it to be dramatically different from the past.
I don’t think the questioning of Sonal Shah would have much steam if she was just observantly performing pujas at her local temple, so the conflation of being a Hindu with being part of the VHP-A (in fact, its leadership!) is fallacious. For example, I know several people who were members of their local university chapter of the HSC when they were in school, because it provided them a community that observed major Hindu festivals, and was mostly social in nature. However, the national HSC is an entirely different beast, and I think it would be reasonable to distinguish between these associations (for example, I’d bet that many people in local HSCs might not even have been aware of Sangh associations and selective silence of the national HSC). I raise this example not to divert the debate to a discussion on the HSC, but to question the specious comparisons that are being made of Sonal Shah being persecuted because she is a “proud Hindu” (whatever that means), and being labeled as a terrorist purely because she doesn’t subscribe to the strawman of the “secular Hindu”.
I am also extremely confused by those who complain that Hinduism is being held to a higher standard. Even if I granted this conceit (which I don’t – the VHP gets a free pass internationally for its actions in India, a point that was made multiple times by one or more commenters – as a justification for membership in the VHP-A – on this or a related thread, if I recall correctly), isn’t the argument that Hinduism is “better” than the virulent strains of Islam, or the missionary equivalents of ambulance-chasers who greedily harvest souls, that are prevalent today? How sympathetic should we be to Muslims who condone the toxic teachings by some madrassas, or rhetoric such as Anjum Chaudhary’s by pointing to Kashmir or Gujarat or Iraq or Afghanistan, or even, local grievances like racial or religious discrimination? If Hinduism should only be held to the same standard as these extremes, would Hindus be comfortable with the same kind of “respect” that is accorded Muslims, the Islamic leadership ethos, and Islam itself (depending on your vantage point) for its failures in actively distancing itself from these elements of its religion? Or is it just that Hinduism is clearly so much “better”, or “in peril”, that it justifies support of these ideologies?
I’m going to continue on my “thats-so-not-cool-brah” chain of thought…
This post is doomed to go off topic with someone bringing up Godhra about 45 times and someone else browbeating their Hindu-Pride…And leading to the references of the VHP as a “terrorist” organization and consequently all those who associate or try bringing negotiating a common ground as bigots…
I’ve spent a good chunk of the past year on Cross-Cultural research in the context of Counterinsurgencies (if anyone thinks that sounds smart, trust me I don’t have that much of a role to play in the “intellectuality” of it) I would like to show two quotes from a study on Negotiating Collective Identity done by researchers at the International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Resolution with the Columbia University
“…one of the things that frustrates me about this conflict thinking about this conflict is that people don’t realize the complexity, I don’t think people look at how many stakeholders there are in there and how much people are playing their angle…I think there’s a whole element to this particular conflict to where you start the story, to where you begin the narrative, and clearly it’s whose perspective you tell it from. Do you tell it from the perspective of the conquered Palestinian people who had their land taken away from them and have basically been pawns on the world chess board for decades upon decades, if not centuries, or do you take it from the perspective of the Jewish people, having survived a terrible genocide and looking for a home…One of the things that’s always struck me is that there is very compelling narratives to this conflict and all are true, in as much as anything is true…I think the complexity is on so many levels and I think it’s fighting against a place, where particularly in the United States, in American culture, we want to simplify we want easy answers. We want to synthesize it down to something that’s…that people can wrap themselves around and take a side on…â€
“…one of the things I’ve been frustrated with lately more than anything else is the contextualization. When you have conversations with American Jews they contextualize everything as having started 19 months ago. But there’s stuff that’s been going on 34 years and there’s stuff that’s been going on 50 years and there’s stuff that was going on with the British mandate and the state of Israel, then the Ottoman Empire.â€
I’m sure there are several of you on this thread who are from Illinois and voted for Blagojevic, he had relations with Slobodan and none of you seemed to have a problem with that…
What about the Muslim Congressmen who openly sympathize with CAIR meeting, why is that never a problem for you? Because you will be accused of racism due to them being black? or because it isn’t an easy (sic. Hindu) target?
Godhra is contextually relevant, but I don’t know how many of you realize that the riots would have happened even if the VHP was not involved. I bet most of you never read the reports of the committee that investigated the riots and concluded that the Muslim group that burned down the train had actually plotted the thing with intent to provoke the situation? (By the way I can’t wait for someone to compare the point I just made to the “Rape: She was asking for it by dressing slutty”-defense”.)
To belaboredly bringing up the point time and again that a fresh-out-of-college student (and woman) was at an “influential position” the “leadership council” of an organization whose leadership probably consists of mostly Older (mostly) Immigrant-Indian (mostly) Men …(no offense Rob)…is just stretching your own hypotheses…
The only double standards being applied here, by the author and some others, is to India. That the parent VHP and its office-bearers are clearly hate-criminals is obvious to the author. An office bearer of its US franchise (even if a legally distinct entity) is being given a free pass. If this were the Klan in the US, and we were discussing the office bearer of an ideological affiliate, would Amardeep have given all these excuses and work-arounds? No, because they would have involved American hate crimes and American lives. Can you imagine the prime-time ruckus ensuing if a former Klan-affiliate was appointed to a transformational president-elect’s transition team? Of course, here we are talking Indian hate-crimes and Indian lives, which surely is less precious. As a first generation Indian American, I have serious problems with that.
Dear Label Whore,
What Chopra was discussing was the Radical muslims along the Paki/Afghan border. In his reference, he wasn’t discussing the Shah of Iran. Yes, the US’s role did contribute to some sort of radicalization, but they (the Soviets)became emboldened by defeating the bolsheviks. I still say that the Russians are the main reason to blame for the radicalization of muslims in the Pakistani/Afghani border. Yes, Carter & Zginibew are to blame for the radicalization in the shiite region of the world. SO there, I agree somewhat with you. Happy?
Dear Label Whore,
Reagan is the tooth fairy, btw. Reagan was awesome. Bush II ruined the Republican party. 🙁 . Time for Jindal or Romney to make America better the years to come.
Why did it Sonal quit working for VHPA and started her own organization IndiCorps instead? She could have carried on her Indicorps line of work under VHPA banner too, couldn’t she have? VHP/VHPA do many charity and welfare projects and Indicorps could have been one more – VHP encourages volunteers to come up with projects that interest them. So working under VHPA banner would have been perfect for Sonal. Than what made Sonal break away from VHPA and found her own Indicorps? It is clear that Sonal was only interested in humanitarian work for earthquake victims, not VHPA/VHP. That her personal association with VHPA was limited, for a short-time and a mere passing phase in her life.
During Gujarat earth quake, most Gujaratis had rallied behind large well-established organizations to channel humanitarian aid – and VHPA was the largest organization for Hindus at that time. Most Gujaratis who had no affiliation with VHPA had turned to it to channel their volunteer support and monetary aid for the earthquake relief. Sangh organizations had done exemplary work during earthquake relief – no other organization could match the breadth and depth of relief operations that Sangh Organization brought to the earthquake ravaged areas. Many volunteers and small organizations had chosen to channel their resources thru Sangh organizations because they had the best logistics and infrastructure for delivering relief to the earthquake ravaged areas. People didn’t care about the means of delivering relief, their immediate priority was getting the relief to the victims and they supported whoever they felt was capable. People didn’t care about ideologies of organizations or ideologies of victims. They just reached out to help. It happens during all natural calamities in India. Person like Sonal should be commended not pulled down. It is a shame that some people, out of political malice, are out to pull down an Indian. Her position is not a political office, nor she is a political person, yet people are bent on imposing their petty politics on her and pull her down. What a shame.
Political malice is not a bad thing – it’s what keeps a democracy vibrant. Moreover, pulling down Sonal would be a net positive long-term for the country. Bear in mind – Sonal does not need the job that this administration is giving her. The administration needs her more that she needs them. And there are some of us who want to stop her by any legal means possible, including political malice.
Moreover, this is an excellent reason/pretext to stop her appointment. I know – it’s frivilous and meaningless, but it sets a precedent that could be used against…others…over a period of time.
Short term losses. Long term gains.
M. Nam
Indian: “That the parent VHP and its office-bearers are clearly hate-criminals is obvious to the author”
No. It is not obvious to millions of Hindus. What is obvious is this rabid hatred of any hindu organization that seeks to preserve, propagate, and protect the faith of millions of Hindus in their own homeland. It is hindus who have been target of religious cleansing in India, under hate-attack from Jehadis and missionaries and leftist fundamentalists. Hindus are denied even defensive posture against the coordinated hate aggression. Hindus know millions of their bothers and sisters have been mercilessly liquidated in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir. So Hindus know who are the real hate-criminals. You guys like to blow up only hindu reactions to anti-hindu hate-crimes for your ideological posturing. VHP-like organizations thrive because of you guys, not because of Sonal.
122 · Amardeep said
Thank you, sir. I try.
Nayagan, Neengalthan ennethu mihaviruppamana yidethu pakkhathu aal. 🙂
rob,
I’m utterly disgusted with myself–I took a full minute to translate that and couldn’t respond in kind. Anyhow, my non-aligned atheist hindu non-organization doesn’t issue membership cards or charge fees, so all are welcome…
“Can you imagine the prime-time ruckus ensuing if a former Klan-affiliate was appointed to a transformational president-elect’s transition team? Of course, here we are talking Indian hate-crimes and Indian lives, which surely is less precious. As a first generation Indian American, I have serious problems with that.”
i’m not american and don’t care if shah is part of obama’s team or not, but isn’t one of the longest-serving senators, robert byrd, a past member of the klan? From the l.a. times:
“As is noted in virtually every lengthy story about Byrd, as a young man he joined the Ku Klux Klan. There has been an ongoing dispute about the length of his membership and his commitment to the Klan’s racist cause — Byrd over the years has minimized his involvement; others have said that in doing so he ignores the facts.”
It seems there are at least some superficial similarities between the Shah and Byrd situation. have santorum et. al and anyone opposed to shah been as consistent in going after byrd for his past dubious connections? after all, he’s now a respected member of the powerful u.s. government. he also openly endorsed obama.
again, from the l.a times:
“The issue was examined by the Washington Post in a 2005 article headlined “A Senator’s Shame.”
What has not been in dispute is Byrd’s mea culpas. The Post piece ended with this quote from him:
“I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times … and I don’t mind apologizing over and over again. I can’t erase what happened.”
121 · Nayagan said
A couple things:
1) Can we please stop bringing back this weaselly language of guilt by association? The issue isn’t association, but AFFILIATION — the conscious choice of a mature, well-informed, highly-educated woman to participate in the work of a hate-mongering group.
2) Who’s Matt Yglesias, and why should I care?
For the rest, I think I would need to compile a dummy’s guide to dialectics, and something tells me it’s not worth the bother….
You couldn’t order a pizza without getting frightened over what the delivery boy will say to you, MoorNam. Your….pompous….Machiavellian….scheming….on the….internet….is….hilarious.
Stick to watching Priya Rai movies with your blood boiling, Mr Pooter on the computer.
“Mr Pooter on the computer.”
off-topic, but Diary of A Nobody is such a charming read.
134 · Ponniyin Selvan said
Whats the problem with these “progressive” commies? Why do they get all hot and bothered by widow burning and other such trivialities?