Is Desi A Racist Word?

12-12-2008, 03:44 PM

I just came across this article after searching for this word after being called a 'desi' by another Indian living in the UK.

I have never understood the word desi before, known where it came from, nor why Indian people kept on using this word to describe themselves and other Indians, so I first looked up the definition of desi:

QUOTEDesi (or Deshi) is a word originally from Sanskrit literally meaning "from the country" or "of the country". The term "Desi" refers to a person of South Asian heritage, from either Pakistan, India, or Bangladesh

It is mainly used by those of South Asian origins themselves, rarely by the majority population, and carries a subtext of inclusiveness and unity. It allows South Asians to refer to their broader immigrant community, rather than requiring a specific, nationalistic label such as "Indian" or "Pakistani". As such, its connotations are positive, alluding to the shared values, bonds and experiences of descendants of the entire region.

This definition makes the word sound fine to use, but I still did not feel too comfortable about people running around yelling 'desi' at me, so I furthur looked up desi and racism and read this artice:

http://www.indiacurrents.com/news/view_art...4472a08cf77270c

QUOTEMy friendâs five-year-old came home from school one evening with a note. She had referred to her Chinese friend as a âChinkiâ and her teacher wanted to know why. My friend looked sheepish as she read the note.

âShe mustâve picked it up from us. We sometimes do say âChinki,â you know,â she revealed guiltily.

We Indians love labels, donât we? And I donât mean Guccis and Pradas. I mean labels for people, of both Indian and non-Indian origin. It helps us match person to personality, gives us a ready manual for assessing behavior and associated characteristics. We donât like being caught unawares by unfamiliar personality types and donât seem to realize that our love for quick allocations could amount to a serious affliction: racism.

We are desis in a foreign country. Indian-Americans raised in the United States are promptly tagged ABCDs (American Born Confused Desis). And for a certain population of desis, the Chinese become âChinkis,â African-Americans become âKallus,â and white people become âGoras.â We see nothing wrong in making casual use of these names. We permit ourselves to do the very thing that would likely offend us if we were on the receiving end. If one were to ever refer to us as âbrowniesâ or, even more disturbingly, as ârag heads,â we would be screaming âracism!â from the rooftops.

Racism is ill defined within the Indian community. I have come across people who think that only the discrimination on part of white people is racist. Their own discriminatory behavior, however, is permissible.

Bollywoodâs portrayal of Caucasians, for example, makes me wonder if we have been fighting the freedom struggle a little too long after independence. Most white characters are portrayed as money-hungry, double-crossing villains who the hero mocks in Hindi or triumphs over in the end.

Is ethnic labeling within the Indian community itself considered to be acceptable and fine? I have never been comfortable with my parents over use of the words 'Gora' and 'Kallah', and feel uncomfortable when these racial words are used, often in a deregratory manner. I have however, never heard my parents, nor anyone of the older generations in my familly and Indian community use the word 'Desi' to call each other, in fact this word seems to be rarely used if anyone does use it, and only seems to be spoken carelessly by members of the younger Indian generation living in the UK who think it is a 'cool', or 'modern' name to call each other by (I am from the UK and rarely ever hear the word Desi used, and when I do I feel just as offended as the words 'Gora' and 'Kallah' have made me feel throughout my years, and also just as offended as a black person would be if called a N*gger, or a Pakistani person in this country called a P*ki).

So am I the only Indian person that finds it offensive for someone to come up to me and call me a 'Desi'? What is wrong with calling me by my name, or if my race is being discussed, reffering to me as an Indian instead of a desi? Do you think that this label of desi is fine and acceptable to use? Do you or do you not refer to other Indians as desis, and would you like it if people of other races, e.g. 'Goras' and 'Kallahs' used strange words to refer to you by your race or skin color as well?

I know that I do not accept, nor like any kind of labelling or branding based on the grounds of skin colour and / or race. I have never been called anything personally at school, university, at work, or by friends, teachers and employers of all races other then my name, and my race is never discussed in any enjoyable social situation, I find that I am better able to integrate and mix with people of any background if racial names, which I will in my opinion brand as racist name-calling, are left out of my discussions, and I only refer to people by their name, or preffered nick name, and not a name describing their race or skin colour.

dhu · (This post was last modified: 12-12-2008, 04:56 PM by dhu.)

Aha, you probably feel like you are being drafted into a "movement" or "religion" or "brotherhood" or even "cult" (different from heathen type traditions present in India/Asia).

"Desi" word is part of the "South Asian" religion which seeks to browbeat Indians into being part of the "South Asian" ummah. Cultural Dynamics are different for Indian type civilization -versus- the homogeneizing colonizers in west to which this South Asian "movement" belongs and serves very specific "purposes", namely control. Heathen traditions are orthopraxic while western (abrahamic) religions are orthodox. Your experience or feelings are result of dissonance from Colonialism, an historical fact. Better not to ignore or trivialize your experiences.

Term like 'Indian' is different. Pre-colonialism, even person in Thailand would have refered himself/herself as 'Indian' without problems. Term Indian does not signify an ideological "Movement" of being Indian.

Google "Rajiv Malhotra Axis" and continue from there. It will take a few months of searching to come to an understanding. Another lead is Balagangadhara.

Also see member Husky's post here (intraforum link) for how heathen traditions or native-type identity is divested or wrested away from the colonized and replaced by a new colonized identity of "brown" "desi" and so on.....

12-12-2008, 06:07 PM

Thank for that post, this quote here sums it up quite well for me:

QUOTEFrom the Hindu POV, since we don't get the whole 'black and white' dialogue and have learnt that an exterior match is no assurance (that is, we know that people who look Indian can be hyper anti-Hindus), Hindus don't really know who has ascended to presidency in America - what Obama's identity is. Because Hindus don't see it in the way Colin Powell sees this event. Some Hindus - those who still think that anyone who looks Indian and has a Hindu name 'must be' Hindu, even though they might actually be crypto instead - may see Obama as a person that marks the end of colonialism in the Americas. But they are naive, ignorant. American reality is very complex - very pedestrian and petty, but a muddle of predictable complexity (predictable if you know the values of the unknown variables).

I gave up on Hinduism at around 12 years of age when I asked my mum how Ganapati got his elephants head, and as a bright science student couldnt help but ridicule the whole story of 'Human head chopped off, elephants head stuck on', and I have heard one of my uncles, actually my mums younger brother, also say the exact same thing as me. At least my mum, who is a highly devout Hindu, who tried to teach me hinduism got it completely wrong, and and I couldnt ever believe or understand her stories of the religion as real. I never refer to myself as Hindu or Desi, only as an Indian, and the term Indian, or British-Indian are the only ones that I find acceptable, not 'Brown' or 'Desi'. Skin colour is really only used to describe a person if identifying them to someone else who doesnt understand who you are talking about, but usually then it is still correct to refer to the person by nationality, rather then skin colour or appearance. Basically, we are taught not to identify people by their outer appearance, and not to use words that are racial or based on skin colour. However, from some Hindu's / Indian's point of view, using the words 'desi', 'gora' and 'kallah' isnt offensive because they do not consider this black and white dialogue when using these words, and just identify people by their race as soon as they see them.

Obviously, growing up in the UK or America with a western education teaching that 'racial words are wrong' is different to the way my parents and older generations of Indians that live here are raised and use words to describe people. Although it is unbelievable how many people in my generation, and even younger ones here still get it wrong, at least when I went to university and was among educated people, race or skin colour was never an obstacle or limitation in anyway to any of my daily activities. But outside of the academic field, and also employment where everyone has to abide to equity in employment laws or they risk losing their job, plenty of everyday people of any race, whether they are Indian, British, or Pakistani still go around using racial terms to describe other people (It is not just Hindus and Indian people like my parents do, it is just that I obviosly notice it from my family more then anywhere else because I am with them everyday), and unfortunately, some people are also prejudiced and deregrotory towards people of different races and skin colour.

I like the section that I read on Obama, that Americans refer to him as the USA's first Black president. When I look at Obama, I obviously notice his skin colour, but I do not think 'Americas (first) Black President', I dont see him as any different to, lets say, Bush, unless he proves to be a better leader then he was, although he has my optimism because Bush has completely wrecked both the country and its image, I still cant be certain yet if Obama will make a good president untill I see and judge his actions. To me he is just 'Americas President', and he won because his competition, the Republican party, was terrible and hardly anyone liked them and wanted a change in government.

I wont be able to help feeling offended at being called desi, but at the same time I do not say anything like that back to person, but express a desire to be uncomfortable speaking to them. Although it is definately more offensive a few times when my mum has actually said to me 'What do you think you are, a Gora?', which always leads to an unavoidable argument, I am at least fortunate to not have to deal with such terms when I am at work or with friends. Although some people do still go around using racial words in public, these are normally people that I do not want as friends, just like anyone that calls me a desi is going to have a hard time getting me to like them or enjoy being in their company.

One thing I also dislike is when an Indian person walks up to me, and hands me a leaflet for a Hindu festival celebration, or Indian club of some kind, or when I am at work (I only work in a supermarket still), and an Indian customer walks up to me and says 'Are you Indian?'. The reason I do not like this is because I am being looked at and judged by someone else, and oddly enough, I only encounter this from some Indian people. Similarly I was asked once at work by another Indian employee 'Do you speak in Gujerati?', which I do but I am terrible at it, so I reply 'No, I only speak English, is that a problem?'. If I am at work, or in public, I find it disrespectful to people around me who only speak in English if I begin having conversations in Gujerati. This to me is just a way of saying 'I want to isolate myself among only people who speak in Gujerati'. At least when I talk to others, I never need to look at them by their race, or ask them what their race is, I learnt this lesson from a friend who was half caste Philipino and Irish, but she looked 100% Japanese, and she was highly offended by people who asked her if she was Japanese. I do not believe that you can integrate into a multi cultural society if you walk around identifying and judging people by their race or appearance, and this has definately been shown to me by the vast differences between me and my family.

That is my rant over on how I feel about being called a Desi, or judged in anyway because of the way I look.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 12-13-2008, 04:58 PM by Husky.)

Definition and demarcation of races keep changing, have nary a scientific basis - outside of the racist basis of US society and govt, I don't think any western country's govt still subscribes to the word (certainly not the ones I've been in).
Since 'race' is a mythological construct that is dependent on faith and is unscientific from what I have learnt throughout school and from reading and watching documentaries (yeah, I wasn't unfortunate enough to 'study' in the US), and since I'm not prone to 'believing', it is hardly necessary for me to say that I don't believe in 'race'.

In contemporary life, the word 'race', when it came to humans and in the countries where I have lived (outside of India, that is; obviously I never heard the word 'race' used in India, let alone came across any equivalent in my language) has only ever been referred to in the negative sense: for example, "people wrongly believed in race theory" or "the nazis believed they were of the imaginary arisch race". Negatively except for the use in human race - or dwarf race or alien races (fantasy, sci-fi - where it is used more like the term species).

As for Desi, never called myself that. Sounds really cheap. Am not cheap.
Have called myself Hindu, Indian and Bharatiya (=Dharmic of Bharatam <!--emo& Smile

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />).

However, interesting that Bhavv (who previously had issues with India being called Bharatam) has doubled back to slice open this topic. Comes across rather like needling to insinuate that Hindus are 'racist' for calling themselves 'Desi' - though I never met a Hindu who did that <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' />, only psecularados and they're hardly ever Hindus anyway.

Possibly Bhavv has no problem with Chinese calling their country Middle Kingdom (Chung Kuo) implying their land lies in the middle of the globe, let alone any pangs of conscience with the christoterrorist English having dubbed the native Cymry as foreigner slaves (=meaning of 'Welsh'), or that the word slave is the medieval christian racists' derivation of Slav, as in Yugoslavs, Russians, Poles, and the other Slavic peoples. Or that the Mamluks are the "white slaves" of islam (and of course there are the "black slaves" as well, see for example the victims of islamism's caste system in Yemen). Or any disturbance in Bhavv's conscience concerning the glorious christo-hierarchy of blacks, whites, "injuns", mulattos (I can't even spell these alien christoterrorist words of insult, I barely understand their meaning), further christian inanities about "half and pure breeds" (terms the christoterrorists of the US uniquely applied to native Americans, as if the people were horses <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /> ), "eskimos".
One wonders where Bhavv's indignation was then.
There's the 'n' word for Indians and Africans or people of African origin (also blatantly present in the name of gov'ner "I'll be bak" Ahnuld).
Then there's a host of modern racist christoAmerican names for other people they've gleefully bombed: Gooks, Japs, Rags=American term for Arabians.
Sick. The list is too long. Christoterrorism's vocabulary is full of slurs.

Or perhaps, Bhavv was merely choosing to be ignorant about the world while playing 'neutral' disapprover of Indian, Indians and particularly Bharatiyas. This is especially odd, when our situation can not even be remotely compared to any of the above.

QUOTEIs ethnic labeling within the Indian community itself considered to be acceptable and fine? I have never been comfortable with my parents over use of the words 'Gora' and 'Kallah',Â and feel uncomfortable when these racial words are used, often in a deregratory manner. I have however, never heard my parents, nor anyone of the older generations in my familly and Indian community use the word 'Desi' to call each other, in fact this word seems to be rarely used if anyone does use it, and only seems to be spoken carelessly by members of the younger Indian generation living in the UK who think it is a 'cool', or 'modern' name to call each other by (I am from the UK and rarely ever hear the word Desi used, and when I do I feel just as offended as the words 'Gora' and 'Kallah' have made me feel throughout my years, and also just as offended as a black person would be if called a N*gger, or a Pakistani person in this country called a P*ki).I don't know anyone who talks about goras, kallahs (what is that).

But how telepathically compassionate of you to know what an African person feels like when he's called by the christoterrorist n-word. It's deeply moving.
It is this deep-seated feeling in pseculars - whenever they use some sinister story surrounding their own purported situation as an example to denounce/get other Indians to denounce something in Indian society.

And why is there a * in Paki. It's only a slur in England. Even Pakistani sounds like a slur. (Actually, Pakistan sounds like a really bad insult, but, they *would* name their country that and would not have argument....) Heartwarming to see yet another psecular 'Indian' defend TSPers' "honour" - their honour in bombing us. Do ask them to drop by your house next time instead of them sending their love to the rest of Bharatam. Islamic love is too costly for Hindus, but you perhaps find the price tag is perfect for you?

I don't need your psecular faux-arguments to convince me that Desi is a lame term. It *is* a lame term. But for entirely different reasons from those your conditioned thinking gave rise to.
It's actually for the reasons that Dhu mentioned above that I had an instinctive aversion to the word (too many psecular opinions online emanated from owners who self-designated as Desi).

QUOTEI know that I do not accept, nor like any kind of labelling or branding based on the grounds of skin colour and / or race.You really believe in races, don't you. Only people who believe in it can be racists - it's a fundamental requirement for it. And, what's more, believing in the concept is already the first step to becoming a racist.
So, until IF admin tells me off for it (they certainly have every right to), I'm going to call you a psecular racist. You can't possibly mind. Because it's factually accurate - as also in the country I live now.

QUOTEI know that I do not accept, nor like any kind of labelling or branding based on the grounds of skin colour and / or race.And another bit of the eternal silliness in the same arch-psecular sentence: the careful psecular dance around skin colour again. So sick of this story. So sick of insipid psecularism. It has no independent thought.

I like skin colour. I regularly stare unashamedly at people and animals because I think they are beautiful. And their skin is a small but not insignificant part of what I think is beautiful - so much colour and texture, indicating so much life. Light to deeply dark humans from different parts of my Bhu Devi. Visual Treat. Their lovely faces, the colour of their voices, their shapes. Ahh. Cuddly animal colouring and soft fur on the quadrupeds. Gorgeous.
As complete an experience in itself as watching scenic nature. My Gods' pawprints all over this world.
I have no shame in admitting to my 'obsession' with people's appearances. People, like animals, look Yum (in a non-edible way, of course).

From your allergic description of it, it is clear that skin colour is an offense to your psecular sensibilities (no point in denying, I have years of experience in reading people's character from their silly giveaways in words). It is clear from the way you discuss it. You are no doubt "colour blind" or, even more psecularly, "particularly not colour blind" (both dialogues to score deeper and deeper points in modern morality are christoracist nonsense).
Jeebusjehoballah forbid someone be 'dark'; to you, their very darkness is a sign of their 'inevitable' oppression. You must defend them from the world: save them from the 'consequences' people like you impose on them for something that doesn't remotely bother the Free World. No one needs to save anyone from me. I take them as they come. Heathen mind is truly free, truly happy.

Well, what d'ya know. Pseculars of Indian origin - though ever eager to pretend they are Moral Superiority Itself with their flowery words and their deeply insipid thoughts - were always more narrow-minded and bigoted than traditionalist Hindoos. No surprises. All Hindoo Mowglis tend to emerge with truly better character, and do so naturally, innately, without trying - let alone resorting to the sort of contrived arguments that pseculars try to guilt-trip people with. Hindoo Jungle's Dharma (intuition and introspection on the world) wins against christoconditioned shallowness (handheld patterned 'thinking') every time.

QUOTEOne thing I also dislike is when an Indian person walks up to me, and hands me a leaflet for a Hindu festival celebration, or Indian club of some kind, or when I am at work (I only work in a supermarket still), and an Indian customer walks up to me and says 'Are you Indian?'.Deep.

QUOTESimilarly I was asked once at work by another Indian employee 'Do you speak in Gujerati?', which I do but I am terrible at it, so I reply 'No, I only speak English, is that a problem?'.Deeper still.

QUOTEnever need to look at them by their race, or ask them what their race is, I learnt this lesson from a friend who was half caste Philipino and Irish, but she looked 100% Japanese, and she was highly offended by people who asked her if she was JapaneseCasteist and racist. How unexpected.
And the friend sounds faithfully catholic, else certainly properly christoconditioned by her catholic parents.

QUOTEI gave up on Hinduism at around 12 years of ageOf course you did.

Shambhu · 12-12-2008, 07:11 PM

If a guy of Pakistani origin shows signs of being a jihadi, I casually ask him if he is Paki. There are other Pakistanis who hate Pakistan and jihad, those people I don't call paki. But jehadis I do, and I love doing it!! Paki means pubic hair in Urdu, I've been told, and since then I have found that a whole new universe filled with rainbows opens up whenever I call a jihadi "paki"!!

Bodhi · 12-12-2008, 08:16 PM

"deshI" is a lovely word. Actually a perfect word to describe not only a genetic Indic in videsha, but also a *true* Indic with roots in the tradition of swadesha and swadharma.

"deshI" has for a long time also meant shuddha or pure. (e.g. "deshI-ghI" for pure cow-ghI as opposed to the other vareities).

12-12-2008, 10:31 PM

I don't think the term is offensive at all. Sometimes it is used in a self-deprecating manner. Humor is good. In some circles it is mostly to identify the person is Indian. One mention of the word, and quickly the mind realizes the cultural context and background of the person. The words 'chinku' and 'kallu' can be used in a deprecating and non-deprecating manner. Usually the word 'chinku' is loaded; it usually points to the manner in which Chinese people behave. It is stereotyping.

Incidentally, some tamilians use the term 'chinna kannan' - 'person with small eyes'

Racism (Western construct) and any Indic practices that are used to stereotype people are part and parcel of life. In the absence of "civilisation" they will surface out.

dhu · 12-13-2008, 03:05 AM

Temporary link (i will try to post the slide images later)

Jasdev Singh Rai - Tensions of Stereotypes (powerpoint)

discusses race from Indian viewpoint

**shamu** · 12-13-2008, 12:22 PM

Desi is not at all a racist word. Many Indians proudly identify themselves as Desis.

From what Bhavv wrote, I get a feeling that he doesn't want to be identified as an Indian. Unfortunately other naive Indians don't understand that and try to get closer to him as a fellow Indian. I think the best response he could give is "I am British". If the other Desi asks where Bhavv is originally from, he could respond by saying that that doesn't matter. I think that poor Desi will get the message.

BTW, if you go from north to south, and east to west, you will see Indians in shades of colors. Surprisingly, India happens to be the only country in the world shere such a feature exist among indigenous population. In all other countries, people will be of one particular color, unless there is a mix of different types if people like Africans and Arabs in Egypt etc. So, the color tag "brownie" doesn't really reflect Indian skin color.

There is a joke about this. One British asked Gandhiji about this and he responded like this. Horses have different colors but donkeys have only one color.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 01-11-2009, 09:27 AM by Husky.)

QUOTE(shamu @ Dec 13 2008, 12:22 PM)BTW, if you go from north to south, and east to west, you will see Indians in shades of colors. Surprisingly, India happens to be the only country in the world shere such a feature exist among indigenous population. In all other countries, people will be of one particular color, unless there is a mix of different types if people like Africans and Arabs in Egypt etc. So, the color tag "brownie" doesn't really reflect Indian skin color.[right][snapback]91789[/snapback][/right]Shamu, at my uni there are many international students and students of diverse overseas origin. From my experience, even within the same countries (and families) in Africa there's a whole range of colours. In Japan there are darker and lighter shades, as also in China. India has a wider range than in JP & CN though.

QUOTEFrom what Bhavv wrote, I get a feeling that he doesn't want to be identified as an Indian.Shamu, Bhavv is an open book. I'd designate her as a modern-day Merle Oberon, a replica in our time.
In case anyone is not familiar with who Merle Oberon is, she's a "siren" of the Hollywood black and white cinema era. Here's some parts of her bio to clarify why I brought her up:
QUOTEMerle Oberon was born in Bombay, of mixed Welsh-Indian parentage,
Her father hailed from Britain and her mother from Ceylon (now Sri Lanka).

To hide her half-Indian parentage, she would falsely represent to visitors that her mother was the maid.

In 1949, twelve years after her mother's death, she commissioned a painting of her mother from an old photograph, instructing the painter to lighten her mother's complexion in the painting to hide the fact that she is part-Indian.
Merle was a christian of course (her mum too probably).

Here, Merle=Bhavv and Merle's mother=Bhavv's ancestry. Both mother and ancestry just tag along as unwanted baggage since they can't be got rid of. An inconvenience that has to be borne.

Bhavv's "I don't like calling myself Desi - I call myself British Indian or Indian."
Yet "I don't like others asking whether I am an Indian."

Very interesting that someone
- who is specifically not a Hindu
- who does not identify with Bharatam (And even when it comes to country names, she - though a British 'Indian' - prefers *Indians* to use the word India, and was previously all eager to imagine/argue that the word itself had nothing less than superior English christo origins <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /> )
- who would designate herself some sort of Indian if it came to it, but preferably not if anyone *Indian* were to ask her
- who doesn't like to be asked whether she speaks 'Gujerati' (from what I know, it's spelled 'Gujarati' though I neither hail from there nor do I speak the language. Anyways, this interesting misspelling by Bhavv reminded me of the BBC news starlet of Hindu name I once saw presenting the news and who kept insisting that many "Hindi people at the Hindi Temple had died of a stampede" - in order to clearly indicate her own distance from the Hindoos).
QUOTEBhavv wrote: Similarly I was asked once at work by another Indian employee 'Do you speak in Gujerati?', which I do but I am terrible at it, so I reply 'No, I only speak English, is that a problem?'. If I am at work, or in public, I find it disrespectful to people around me who only speak in English if I begin having conversations in Gujerati. This to me is just a way of saying 'I want to isolate myself among only people who speak in Gujerati'.Wow, my French colleague keeps talking to French speakers in French. How 'communal' of him too. No, no - what am I saying - since he's not a Hindoo, he's only "preserving his language" and "doing what comes natural to him".

^ Interesting that such a psecular as Bhavv - who is non-Hindu and would ideally not be identified as Indian nor admit to knowing any more than English in case (gasp) another "Gujerati" wants to speak to her in Goojeratee - comes all the way to IF, which is a nationalist forum of Hindoos, to debate on more than one occasion about Indian identity. I mean, what's up with that? She doesn't identify with it, she's a "British Indian", so why is she here at all, talking with Hindoos (who she would rather not know in real life, I'm sure) about *Bharatam*, Indian self-designation and Indian identity.

Here's two reasonable explanations that come to me as to why she has evangelically invited herself and her opinions over:
1. She seeks confirmation/validation of her position of uppityness as a british indian. She thinks she scores even more points if she could get people to see the matters of 'desi' and Bharatam the same way she does. "If only those Hindoo Indoos could read my deep arguments, I am sure they would immediately see how they cannot use 'Bharatam' for India, should not be 'racist in using Desi' (and would quit believing in Ganapathi too, since I, Bhavv, the self-declared "bright science student", saw through the Hindooo nonsense".

Not quite sure if she is insecure or arrogant in coming all the way here. She shows signs of both.

2. Alternatively, she's just another crypto christian trying to crawl under heathen skin. Certainly, her argument pattern is consonant with others of the ideology.
Why would anyone who doesn't even identify,
- come to a Hindu nationalist forum to 'dialogue',
- choose to dialogue on specifically these topics ("Hindoos are racists; there is no Hindu origin in the naming of the country, bla blah bleh")
- specifically announce they are not Hindu with particular reference to some lame story about Ganapathi,
- and write the following cryptochristo contradiction:
http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index.ph...indpost&p=87841
QUOTEBhavv wrote: I am not giving any benefit of the doubt to christianity, and I do not believe in any of it either, nor in Islam (I am secular). Christianity was founded in 0 BC.The contradiction is in the part where she says she is psecular, does not give any benefit of the doubt to christianism and "does not *believe* in any of it either" and then in the next breath writes that christianism was founded in 0 BC - as per christian theology instead of the history that real bright students of science are fond of (her 'science' - which troubled her when it came to Ganapathi - clearly didn't interfere in questioning christianism...). Surely much belief and benefit of doubt was in fact bestowed by her on the christian narrative.
- and choose to believe that Bharatam was first named 'India' by some English *christian* even though the traditional Ancient Greeks would be a better choice if an arbitrary non-Indian starting point for the name was necessary:
From Bhavv's post 21 of the "India be named as Bharat thread"
QUOTEBhave wrote: The name India came directly from King Alfred's translation of the Orosius:
[...]
Note that although the Orosius is a Christian book, the word India was created simply from a literal translation of the text, and entered the English language. India is only the English name since the 17'th century, one would have to read the Orosius themselves to find the actual word that the translation was based on.
India is just an English word used in the English language that was first used by King Alfred. A very "bright science student" indeed who bypassed the Hindus, Persians, Greeks and Romans to start at christo English instead.

And even if she's not sheep already, she sure is a soon-to-be-sheep. It's perfect for her. (Christo-conditioning is the same as christianism in the long run; it's preparation.)

Whichever of 1 or 2 (or another alternative) it may be:
Her psecular style in arguing through use of personalisation of argument contexts/scenarios - I refer to the example in her posts above, such as "my mother refers to somebody as Gora/Kalas AND that must be racist AND my mother is Hindoo AND Hindoos are racists for inventing/using such words" - is very much like communist Mira Kamdar using references to her alleged Hindoo dad as a personal-narrative-to-larger-reality leverage tool to make insinuations against The Hindoos/Hindooism. (Even assuming neither Kamdar nor Bhavv are lying about their parents, it is clear that not even family is sacred for cryptos and communistas, and they will sacrifice any Hindoos they are related to if it means they can score points for their ideology/push their lame arguments on unsuspecting readers.)
http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/article...ism/kamdar.html
QUOTEMira Kamdar tells us about a paradoxical combination of opinions in her father: "My immigrant Gujarati father is both a liberal Democrat and a supporter of Hindu fascism. This is not as unusual as one might think."
[...]
4. Hate, the concept
That opinion, we are told, amounts to nothing less than hate: "So it has been a great and sad shock to me to realize that my father, who loved Martin Luther King, hates Muslims. He hates them blindly, viscerally, categorically. ( ) in any discussion where Muslims, the Middle East, Bosnia (not to mention Pakistan) comes up, he is wont to fly into an apoplectic rage, turn red in the face, shout until spit begins to pool at the sides of his mouth, shake his fists. The culmination of these fits is always the same. He bends over, seizes the cuff of the right leg of his pants, and pulls it up to show off a series of diagonal dents marching up his shin, scars from a back-alley encounter decades ago with a gang of bicycle-chain-wielding Muslim youths. "This is what Muslims did to me! This is what Muslims do!" Kamdar's "Hindus are facists - see for instance my dad" <-> Bhavv's "Indoos/Hindoos are racists - see for instance my mum"

Anyways, Bhavv inviting herself over to Hindoo nationalist forum IF - in spite of what should be her disinterest in it (going by the logical implications in her posts) - is an evangelical endeavour: her posting behaviour aims to convince through puerile arguments that even include boring and trite narratives. The gist of her "You Indoos are racists for using Desi, doesn't matter at all that that is merely how I (mis)read the situation. Because, how us British (Indians) misunderstand your use of the term Desi *must* in fact also be the way you mean it. Though I don't understand you and I can't remotely relate to your experiences, I *will* nevertheless speak on what pertains to you. And you can have no other opinions." Not unlike how AmeriKKKan 'scholars' keep assuming the right to write lies on Hindu Dharma and Hindu experiences of it, while delegitimising Hindus' right to expression on what pertains to Hindus.

Bad entertainment from a high school student.
I prefer Kindergarten, they know how to argue decisively.

Bharatvarsh · (This post was last modified: 12-13-2008, 07:59 PM by Bharatvarsh.)

This has to be the most purile topic on the forum, labelling is universal human nature and is done across all cultures, there is nothing specifically Hindu about it, latinos call non latinos gringos etc. That is how people differentiate ingroup members from outgroup members. And gora/kallu are literal translations of the mainstream English words white/black. As for me, I am quite used to hearing all desis called as brown and I don't mind it. It may also shock you to know that the vast majority of people like to marry within their ethnic groups (and yes that includes the whites and blacks along with the big bad Indian origin Hindooos).

And lot of ethnic groups like to speak in their own language including Chinese etc outside on the bus which I don't understand but which I frankly don't give a sh1t about. By this purile logic a Quebecois ought to be ashamed of speaking French in Ontario because everyone around him/her is using English, well tell that to the Quebecois and see what reaction you get ...

This is a perfect example of PC bullshit gone wild.

And I got an opinion about people who don't like speaking Gujarati etc even though they know it, i call them sell outs or coconuts.

12-13-2008, 09:08 PM

QUOTEChristianity was founded in 0 BC.
And the World was created at 9:00 AM on October 3rd 4004 BC.

G.Subramaniam · 12-14-2008, 07:36 AM

Desi is a stupid term
it gives shelter to bangladeshis

Husky · (This post was last modified: 12-14-2008, 09:44 AM by Husky.)

QUOTE(Shambhu @ Dec 12 2008, 07:11 PM)Paki means pubic hair in Urdu, I've been told, and since then I have found that a whole new universe filled with rainbows opens up whenever I call a jihadi "paki"!![right][snapback]91750[/snapback][/right]
Then that means Pakistan is the country of...? Ok, never mind finishing that sentence.
See, I was right in considering Pukestan to be a more respectable term. My antlers had long sensed that going about unjudiciously calling the neighbouring terrorist state "Pakistan" may be regarded as uncouth speech on IF:
QUOTEActually, Pakistan sounds like a really bad insult, but, they *would* name their country that and would not have argument....

QUOTEDesi is a stupid term
it gives shelter to bangladeshisThe islamaniacs from BD already stole the Hindu name for all the Bengali region of Bharatam (Bangladesh) from us. Some consolation in knowing they kept a kaffiri name for their country, just like Kashmir still keeps the name of our Amman Kashmira in spite of the bloodthirsty islamic ghouls haunting the Hindu valley in the present.

12-30-2008, 09:28 PM

QUOTEI gave up on Hinduism at around 12 years of age when I asked my mum how Ganapati got his elephants head, and as a bright science student couldnt help but ridicule the whole story of 'Human head chopped off, elephants head stuck on', and I have heard one of my uncles, actually my mums younger brother, also say the exact same thing as me.
I wonder what such people do when they are told that angel Gabriel spoke directly to Mohd who started taking short hand notes. Or say Jesus walked on water. Or burning bush spoke to Moses. Or Mohd ascended to heaven from dome of the Al-Aqsa.

How many have renounced Christanity or Judaism or Islam for such stories.
Or is it that Christanity or Judaism or Islam don't produce 'bright science students' like Bhavv?

12-30-2008, 10:11 PM

Don't forget 72 virgin houris with dates and Camel urine (zum-zum).
Jesus mother Mary was virgin.
Now lot of Breverly Hill cosmetic surgeon are performing surgeries on Middle Eastern women to confirm it as and when required.

01-01-2009, 08:55 AM

QUOTE(Viren @ Dec 30 2008, 09:28 PM)<div class='quotetop'>QUOTEI gave up on Hinduism at around 12 years of age when I asked my mum how Ganapati got his elephants head, and as a bright science student couldnt help but ridicule the whole story of 'Human head chopped off, elephants head stuck on', and I have heard one of my uncles, actually my mums younger brother, also say the exact same thing as me.
I wonder what such people do when they are told that angel Gabriel spoke directly to Mohd who started taking short hand notes. Or say Jesus walked on water. Or burning bush spoke to Moses. Or Mohd ascended to heaven from dome of the Al-Aqsa.

How many have renounced Christanity or Judaism or Islam for such stories.
Or is it that Christanity or Judaism or Islam don't produce 'bright science students' like Bhavv?
[right][snapback]92451[/snapback][/right]
</div>

Sadly this is the factor that I am mentioning in my thread "How to preserve sanaathana dharma" Within the circle of young minds that have overpowering influence of the English education systems and convent backgrounds have been so busy dissecting the theological aspects of Hindusim to give it a modern dressing that they are lost in their scientific investigation asking for "pratayksha pramana"

What really is missed out is that Hinduism has gone far beyond the logical reasoning and at some point of time, no amount of smartness or intellect can actually take us forward.That is when we have to surrender to the Dharmic principles accept the system meant for the welfare of the all in mind"sarve jana sukhino bhavantho"

In one of my recent visits to Gokarna the holy place in North West karnataka I came across a coversation between two individuals.One was feeling pround of the fact that according to legends Lord Ganesh encountered Ravana on the instruction of Lord Shiva and nuetralised the power of the linga gifted to Ravana by Lord Shiva himself as a boon.While the other individual called him stupid and said "how can you be so ignorant,those are all stories and not real, With all your knowledge cant you understand that an elephant headed creature cant exist in human body"

Then I questioned him.....Then pray tell me why are you ardently following the instructions and performing puja here if you feel the very part of why this is a holy place, ridiculous?

He said" I am with the elders and compelled into it .Alone left to decide then I shall not make the absurd mistake of wasting my time here"

I guess this is the price we have to pay for the urbanisation and development .This is the price of the NRI funds and also the Foreign university education systems overlapping on the Indian system.

Every child needs to grow with fairy tales and and stories that stimulates fantasies and imagination in the mind .This is the same across all cultures where there is respect for nature and traditions .Too much scientific thinking at early life develops habit of disputing the fundamentals of our existence.This forever drags the young minds to move out of the system of the Saanaathana Dharma.

Scientific thinking is not wrong but one also has to co-exist with the imaginative fables,myths and legends as they are woven with an element of truth in it which is only meant for common good.

How else can one explain what Samkhya School of philosophy initiated by Sage Kapila that was propounded over 2300 years ago has intricate description of Atoms and "Top quark " which is a sub atomic particle that was proved with its existence only in 1994 
Can any one from these stream of thinking

Husky · (This post was last modified: 01-11-2009, 10:01 AM by Husky.)

1.
QUOTE(Shambhu @ Dec 12 2008, 07:11 PM)If a guy of Pakistani origin shows signs of being a jihadi, I casually ask him if he is Paki. There are other Pakistanis who hate Pakistan and jihad, those people I don't call paki. But jehadis I do, and I love doing it!! Paki means pubic hair in Urdu, I've been told, and since then I have found that a whole new universe filled with rainbows opens up whenever I call a jihadi "paki"!![right][snapback]91750[/snapback][/right]Well, in related news:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7822574.stm
QUOTEPrince's apology for racist term
Prince Harry has apologised for using offensive language to describe a member of his army platoon.

The News of the World has published video in which the prince calls one of his Sandhurst colleagues a "Paki" in commentary he made over filming. <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />
By the way, there's a video at the link. It may be of the Petty Prince pronouncing Paki.

But where's Beverley, I mean "Bhavv"? Wasn't she busy bragging all about her "UK Ra-Ra" and how she learnt to be so open-minded from being a British person (though she had to sadly admit to some Indian origin as well - don't worry, it will wash off for her) as opposed to how Indians are racine or ray-cyst or something or other...
Now that Bev's symbol of ultimate Britishness - his royal somethingness Prince Harry - used the term "Paki" for TSPers, Bev's sadly not here. What a pity, I'm sure she'd have had a pithy witty response. Confused

arcasm:

2.
QUOTE(Kishore @ Jan 1 2009, 08:55 AM)Scientific thinking is not wrong but one also has to co-exist with the imaginativeÂ fables,myths and legends as they are woven with an element of truth in it which is only meant for common good.[right][snapback]92519[/snapback][/right]Another typical Coldsore interjection. I meant Kissore of course - how rude of me to imply he was a sort of STD.

Anyway, Coldsore argues that science should not interfere with "myths" (=lies).
I disagree. Lies should be dispelled and welcome science to do it. Just as it is doing daily to christoislamism.

But our Gods are not myths (lies).
Coldsore bringing his lame argument up with reference to Natural Traditions is, however, very predictable and once more reveals what he is.

dhu · (This post was last modified: 01-11-2009, 10:31 AM by dhu.)

We need a detailed exposition of this phenomenon called ABCD, since we now know about the process of Colonialism in detail. Colonialism results in 'alienation' from one's culture. In a society like India, there is no such thing as cultural alienation. A Punjabi living in the South does not feel alienated form being punjabi or vice versa. Actually, we have to popularize ABCD re-christened as 'colonized' or 'christianized'. This will explain whole host of problems plaguing this precocious indian underclass and automatically point these individuals into the right direction. In same way, self proclaimed 'secular' indians should only be referred as 'colonized' or 'christianized'.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 01-11-2009, 11:48 AM by Husky.)

QUOTE(dhu @ Jan 11 2009, 10:22 AM)We need a detailed exposition of this phenomenon called ABCD, since we now know about the process of Colonialism in detail.Â Colonialism results in 'alienation' from one's culture.Â In a society like India, there is no such thing as cultural alienation.Â A Punjabi living in the South does not feel alienated form being punjabi or vice versa.Â Actually, we have to popularize ABCD re-christened as 'colonized' or 'christianized'.Â This will explain whole host of problems plaguing this precocious indian underclass and automatically point these individuals into the right direction.Â In same way, self proclaimed 'secular' indians should only be referred as 'colonized' or 'christianized'.
[right][snapback]92954[/snapback][/right]Yes, the abracadabras... alien-born (bred) christocolonised desis.

QUOTEIn same way, self proclaimed 'secular' indians should only be referred as 'colonized' or 'christianized'.And self-alienated.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?