Arena

E-mail from readers the world over

Big Apple gone rotten

The Editor,
Rediff,
India

Sir,

This is in reference to "Big Apple gone rotten" by Farzana Versey. I was bit amused by this article. The author has equated all expatriate Indians with the same scale of arrogance. That is unfair. Indian Americans represent fairly broad spectrum of society in India minus tribal.

Arrogance needs to be evaluated on the same guidelines. Some fit in the picture, others do not. Therefore, it would be unfair to equate all Indian Americans by the same token. To brand a broad spectrum of society with a narrow vision is totally unfair. All Indians cannot be branded as "Kala Aadmi".

The article summarizes expatriate Indians as "It is true that Indians do well abroad but, we forget to ask, which Indians. It is the professionals - the rest become cab drivers, waiters and vendors while, here in their hometowns, they could have been farmers, clerks or even small-scale entrepreneurs." I see no problem with this description, except the fact that unlike India, cab drivers, waiters and vendors are NOT considered or evaluated by the so called caste system in India. Most of the well known figures in American business today, started their career flipping hamburgers during jobs in summer vacation.

It is a fact that labor is expensive in US that makes skilled workers like auto mechanics, roofers, plumbers, etc., a well paid commodity. In California, several Sikh migrants who became farmers due to lack of other skills, are affluent and wealthy citizens today, a goal that would have been impossible for them. had they stayed in India.

However, the observation "As for why they do better there, they have to ask themselves. Oh yes, the system here is rotten, but the Americans aren't exactly waiting to get into a clinch with them. The Indians want to be accepted so they themselves put in great effort, they accept the rules, they toe the line. Because they know they have to" is grossly inaccurate. US is a country of immigrants. All the immigrants, present and past were bonded together by language, English. Many Indians have a false notion about American life before coming to US, so they change their first names like Mukund to Michael, try to imitate American lingo to become a laughing stock. On the other hand, there are others who were not "misguided" in India before their arrival in US, retain their identity as it is and manage to merge smoothly in society without a hitch.

My experience shows that the Indians try to create some weird identity for NRIs. Whenever I visited India, I was introduced to younger generation as "uncle who lives in US" by their parents. The younger generation would then, examine me if I have a tail or horns. The parent would then encourage this younger generation to speak to me in English and recite an English poem. And every kid would start with nothing but "Jingle bell". It was really funny for me, although the parents were proud of their kids and their mastery on English.

American society is not formed by Gods but by human beings. They have the same flavors like any other society. Americans are not biased against legal immigrants, except the lower echelon of blue collar workers. Unlike England, Indians are not considered as a threat so far, due to lower number of immigrants in this category. Most Indian immigrants have no problem in smooth assimilation with the society. Like me, there are several who have retained their original first names, have made local friends and have enjoyed life with the community. We enjoy Diwali, Ganapati celebrations with a large American audience without a guilt or inferiority complex.

The funniest statement is "When he is abroad he is a bit of a laugh but, when he returns, he becomes touchy. Then why do we want him back at all? So that Citibank and Grindlay's can say they have an American-returned on their staff?" I migrated to US 25 years back, work for a multi-national company, finished two years assignment in Banglore a few years back and lately, declined another assignment in New Delhi. I can't see any reason why I cannot behave and live reasonably in India, without ever mentioning the fact that I am a naturalized citizen of US.

The author has selected a very narrow segment of Indian Americans to form an opinion. It may be a selling point for Indian readers but certainly not Indian American readers. Please convey my strong displeasure towards the views expressed in this article, to the author.

Prakash Tendulkar

From: Rahul Saraogi <rahul1@nwu.edu>
Date sent: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 14:26:54 -0600

Your report on the averted disaster

It is a pity that our country is being terrorized by a bunch of ruthless people trained by a weak country like pakistan. Instead of following legislation, these terrorists as also those in the north eastern states should be shot at sight.

I do not understand why a country of the might and size of India with the 3rd largest army in the world is not able to protect itself from these jokers who claim to be terrorists.

The problem with our country is that we are too wound up in politics and diplomacy. The reason why the soviet union in the past and china today is rising is that they do not let people who fool around with peace in the country go scot free.

The government should launch a wipeout operation if the peace and security in our country is to be maintained

From: Madhup Rathi <madhup@india.hp.com>
Date sent: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 13:33:31 -0800

Your Report - 'Mahajan seeking political advantage ........'

Hello,

This is not to defend Mr. Bal Thakarey's abuse of Mahatama Gandhi. He deserves all the condemnation that he is receiving.

However, to accuse Pramod Mahajan of 'seeking political mileage .....' is a bit far-fetched.

In fact, the Report does not clearly brings out the statement of Pramod Mahajan in this regard.

Mahajan said that India as a country, was NOT born in 1947. This country is a very old country without exact historical data as to its birth. Hence, to call any PUTRA, son of the country, as its father, is to say the least, downright illogical.

Mahajan further stated in the same press conference, that he respected Mahatma Gandhi as much as any other Gandhian does, for what he did for this country and he (Mahajan) is not even his 'Charan ki dhool', Dirt of this feet. Mahatma, is and will remain, one of the Greatest Sons, that this country, the BharatMata has produced. But, in no way can be called a 'Rashtra Pita', the father of the Nation.

I have picked up the above statement from Sunday Midday, dt 5th Jan of Mumbai and I feel that your above article is NOT an exercise in unbiased reporting.

Thanks

Madhup

From: <kavi@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
Date sent: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:00:34 -0800

Thanks for the wonderful story on Priyanka's marriage. Please give us more such stories. Forget the politicians. Who wants to read about them, any way, except the reporter and the politician himself?

Thanks.

From: Prasad Gopinath <prasad@centrenet.on.ca>
Date sent: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 17:05:06 -0800

Anti-Gandhi Triade

Sir,

To start with my question " What has Chandra Sekhar done for India. He presided over the shipping of India's gold reserves to the Bank of England". I would have drowned myself in a tea cup than done such a thing. Chandra Sekhar is an unprincipled, rudderless politician who dead is more dividend for India than alive. The man professes he is a socialite. I have just one question. I would like to know where he got the money to build his palatial home, fir for every socialite to live.

At least Promod Mahajan makes no bones about his beleifs. Chandra Sekhar preaches one thing and does something else.

As for Promod Mahajan, the great things that Gandhi did for India will never be dimmed by the remarks of ordinary mortals as Mahajan. Majan and his party profess to uplift the well being of Indians. My question for Mahajan - What has he done for Hindu's other than pull down the Babri Masjid( which by the way I support fully). If he wants to do India any good, he and his party BJP must start by reforming the Hindu religion. There is plenty he can do. Upliftment of Hindus is the upliftment of India. If Mother Teresa can do it Calcutta, Mahajan and his folks can do it a thousand times over.

Prasad Gopinath

From: Ashok Chowgule, President, Mumbai Pranth. Mahanagar Vishwa Hindu Parishad,
36 Piroja Mansion,
Opp Grant Road Station (E)
Mumbai 400 007.
Tel: 309 3743/4306
Fax: 307 7551
Date sent: Jan 10, 1997.

We would like to refer to the commentary "Conversion and the State" by Shri Amberish K Diwanji. On behalf of the VHP, I am submitting our rejoinder for the same. We request you to publish it on your site. Pls confirm.

Namaste.

Ashok Chowgule.

CONVERSION AND THE STATE - A REJOINDER

The Commentary by Shri Amberish K Diwanji on the bill to ban conversion through force and fraud gives only one side of the picture. The basic issue is that conversions are morally wrong and this has been stated by so many great personalities. Dr Babasabeb Ambedkar has said, "By joining Islam or Christianity, the Depressed Classes would 'not only go out of the Hindu religion, but also go out of the Hindu culture....Conversion to Islam or Christianity will denationalise the Depressed Classes'. (The Times of India, July 24, 1936.)

In this respect, it is also pertinent to read what Mahatma Gandhi said during his time. "If instead of confining themselves purely to humanitarian work such as education, medical services to the poor and the like, they would use these activities of theirs for the purpose of proselytising, I would certainly like them to withdraw. Every nation considers its own faith to be as good as that of any other. Certainly the great faiths held by the people of India are adequate for her people. India stands in no need of conversion from one faith to another." (M. K. Gandhi, Foreign Missionaries, Young India, April 23, 1931, p.83.)

The Christians also dislike their members embracing other religions. Shri Steven Gelberg of ISKCON, USA, has lucidly brought out this attitude in his article in the book Hindu-Christian Dialogue (Harold Coward, ed.). "ISKCON summer festivals in the streets and parks of major cities have provoked the ire of evangelical and fundamentalist Christians, who have come out to heckle from the sidelines with imposing banners proclaiming 'Get Smart, Get Saved!' and 'Turn or Burn!'" The following methods were suggested to wean the converts back to Christianity: "Parents wishing to extricate their adult offspring from the 'anti-Christian context' of an organization like ISKCON can - if they've first exhausted all legal options, considered the risks and consulted with their pastor - perform Christian 'civil disobedience': disregard whatever laws (for example, kidnapping, false imprisonment, assault and battery) stand in the way, and rescue their son or daughter from the clutches of such a false, non-scriptural religion".

In his book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Pope John Paul II said, "It is not inappropriate to caution those Christians who enthusiastically welcome certain ideas originating in the religions of the Far East - for example, techniques and methods of meditation and ascetical practice. In some quarters these have become fashionable, and are accepted rather uncritically. First one should know one's own spiritual heritage well and consider whether it is right to set it aside lightly." However, when aggressively converting the Hindus, the Pope is very happy to demand that they caste aside their own spiritual heritage - a heritage which is thousands of years older than Christianity.

What is even more amazing is that the Pope is also most displeased when Catholics become Protestants. During his missions to the South Americas he is forever complaining about the methods of the Protestant missionaries there, and in October 1992 he went to the extent of calling them 'wolves'. In the competition of numbers, the Pope is unhappy that the Protestants have increased their numbers in places like Guatemala from near zero some years ago to more than 30% now. Here we have a case where a person still keeps on believing in Christ, but the Pope would like to have the monopoly of being the sole successor of Christ as the intermediary between God and man.

When asked by the missionaries what should be done, the advice given by Mahatma Gandhi can be summarised as follows: "The best thing of course is that you give up conversion altogether, he said....Second, if you must, direct your efforts to those who are in a position to assess these matters; do not make the poor and illiterate and desperate the targets of your campaign....Third, even for (conversions), Gandhiji said, it would be better for non-Indian missionaries to return to their countries and attend to problems there....Fourth, in doing any kind of work among the people, Gandhiji counseled the missionaries, compliment the faith of the people, do not undermine it. Do not de-nationalise them....Finally, instead of the life of the Church, live the life of Jesus, of piety, of the Sermon on the Mount. Let that life, that example persuade people to embrace Christianity if they will, not these vending machines."

Much is made of the fact that in spite of the rule by Christianity and Islam in India, the Hindus form more than 80% of the population. What this does not tell is the story in other countries where the same forces went. The fact of the matter is that in these countries the indigenous people were unable to withstand the force of the invaders, while the Hindus did. Why and how they did is a matter of a separate inquiry.

Similarly, the so-called social service activity of the Christian missionary is repeated again and again. What Mahatma Gandhi has had to say on the subject is stated above. Surely accidental redeeming value is no justification. It is clear from the records of the Christians themselves that if proselytising was not the prime objective, it is doubtful that they would have bothered to come to India at all. Looking at their fund raising programmes, the emphasis is not on the so-called social service, but the fact that this enables them to conduct their proselytising activities.

At an International Conference of Mission Work in Rome, Cardinal Josef Tomko criticised (liberation) theologians like (Paul) Knitter (Professor of Theology at the University of Cincinnati, USA) for being more occupied with 'social work' and 'inter-religious dialogue' than with announcing the Gospel. The answer to this criticism, if the social service was the prime objective was obvious: that announcing the Gospel was redundant, that it was even arrogant, that other people do not need a Christian Gospel and probably many of them have a Gospel of their own as good as the Bible. But Dr Knitter's answer was different. "We are not saying outreach evangelisation should only consist of action of human welfare but we are saying that working for human welfare, is an essential part of the work....It is essential to the Gospel of Christ", he said. Missionary strategist will have no difficulty in agreeing with this view. They already know that 'social service' is a great aid to proselytisation.

Shri Diwanji talks about the lack of social service undertaken by Hindu organisations. Firstly, particularly under the British, the Hindus were prevented from undertaking this task. In the North-East, there was a system of inner line permits, which prevented Hindus from reaching their unfortunate brothers in those areas. And the Hindus were not only politically oppressed but also economically. It is to the credit of the Hindus that they were still able to undertake their social activities.

Secondly, much of the social service work has been commandeered by the government, and the taxes were levied on the citizens. A large majority of tax payers are Hindus. The laws also discriminate against Hindu organisations. For example, while the government insists on managing Hindu temples, those of other religions are allowed to do what they want, whether there is a contravention of law or not. The fact that the government has failed is not the fault of the Hindus. In fact, successive governments have bent backwards to appease the religious minorities. The proposed plan to grant relief to the so-called Dalit Christians is a case in point. While the Christian Churches have miserably failed in removing the caste stigma on these Dalits, they are demanding that the government should undertake the task that they should have done, and what they promised when these Dalits converted. (Incidentally, would it not have been better for the Christian Churches to first do their social service on these Dalit Christians, before doing them on Hindus?) The so-called secular governments are willing to be pawns of the Churches in this nefarious programme.

In any case, it is an utter mistruth that Hindus do not do social service. We may have been late in starting it - but, as explained above, the fault is not of the Hindus. When we have had alien rule, it was not possible to undertake the activities. At the same time, credit must be given to Hindus that they contribute not only to Hindu organisations, but also to many Christian ones, even thought the basic objective of these latter are suspect.

It is indeed amusing that while the attendance to Church activities is falling drastically in all the Christian countries, they have now targeted to take this ideology to Asia and Africa. But in chasing numbers the missionaries, to use Gandhiji's words, became 'just vendors of goods'. And they came to adopt the usual techniques of vendors: the exaggerations common in advertising wares, targeting the sections that would be most susceptible, targeting them at times when they would be most vulnerable, or receptive if you will, using not just dialogue but allurement and violence.

It is most unfortunate that one needs a law to prevent forcible conversion. But, it needs to be recognised that this is a reaction. Let the various Churches follow the advice of Mahatma Gandhi, and renounce that they will convert. However, since their main objective is to proselytise, they will be unable to make such a statement. And, if a law which has been on statute in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Arunachal Pradesh, introduced by the Congress governments of those states, there is no reason why it is not appropriate in Maharashtra.

From: Kabeer Punjabi <kabeer@ix.netcom.com>
Date sent: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 21:29:55 -0800

I have been reading Rediff on Internet since it's inception. It is a great place to get news in timely fashion and to know different views on major issues related to India. You have done a great job. Please keep it up! Cheers!

One writer that interests me most is Mr. Fuzail Jafferey, ex- editor of Blitz. Let me tell you why. But before I do so, let me offer some information on my background.

Born and brought up in Bombay, I've several Muslim friends. My auto mechanic, a Muslim, would not eat his lunch on day of Bakri- Id without me. Ms Jaina Daruwali, aka Jainabai Gandhi, a peace broker between Haji Mastan and Yusuf Patel in early 1960s, considered me as her son (she did not have one of her own, although she had two stepsons from her husband's second wife).

I've lived in US for a long time and enjoyed the freedom of press and TV. I also had an opportunity to read books that were banned in India. I had an opportunity to watch documentaries made by BBC and others on TV that would never be telecast by Doordarshan. I have attended several lectures arranged by Islamic Council discussing the peace loving nature of Islam. I have also heard views of opponents of Islam, Hindus as well as Muslims like Anwar Shaikh.

Last but not the least, I have dwelled in Middle East for several years, can read, write and speak Fusha, classical Arabic and have read Holy Qu'ran several times. I certainly know Holy Qu'ran better than common Muslim in India.

Mr Fuzail Jafferey is a professional writer. He mixes truth and false together in such a wonderful way, that a common man in India would never be able to distinguish the seam.

Your audience is not a common man in India who may not either have an access to Internet or care for it, may be interested more in Bollywood movies rather than documentaries shown in western world. So identifying a seam in Mr. Fuzail Jafferey's articles is not a major issue, if your audience is common man in India.

However, if your audience is NRI in western world and westerners, you are underestimating our knowledge and judgment. The average American certainly is more unfriendly towards Muslims, regardless of country of origin, than average Hindu in India. Explode a bomb in any American city and Americans will start looking suspiciously for people of Middle Eastern origin. After arrests of several terrorists in Pakistan, now Pakistanis are considered by the same token.

Look at the unrest in Saudi Arabia. When Shia Muslims from Iran took hostages in Mecca, Saudi Government had to seek assistance from French commandos, non-Muslim people. Against directives of Holy Qu'ran, they stepped in Mecca. Same thing happened in 1991 during Gulf War. Jewish soldiers stepped on soil of Saudi Arabia. Even today, American forces in Saudi Arabia have Jewish soldiers. That irritates hardliners.

The question is, who are these hardliners and are they working beyond directives in Holy Qu'ran? The answer to latter is No. Hard liners are attempting to implement what has been directed by Holy Qu'ran. Taliban forces are following nothing but Holy Qu'ran and Hadiths. Mr Fuzail Jafferey should know it better.

So what is the root cause? Muslims or Islam? The answer is both. Muslims cannot be Muslim unless they accept Holy Qu'ran and Mohammed as the only prophet and Qu'ran does not preach either peace or tolerance. Unless both conditions are met, a follower is nothing but Kafir. Mr Fuzail Jafferey needs to read Ayats in Surah 2 to understand the views of Islam on any non-believer, whether the person is Hindu, Christian or Jewish. I would love to quote Ayats here but that would be inappropriate since I am not presenting a legal case.

So please tell Mr Fuzail Jafferey to stop shedding his crocodile tears. The Americans and NRIs certainly are more knowledgeable folks to distinguish the seams between truth and lies in his writings. Regarding Shri K N Rao's astrological forecasts, they are perfectly accurate. I've read his book on the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that was very informative. Please convey my regards to him.

Sincerely,

Kabeer Punjabi

From: Prasad Gopinath <prasad@centrenet.on.ca>
Date sent: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 20:10:33 -0800

Terrorists - Why do we have to imprison them. Why can't we hang them!!!

Sir,

I am a bit confused. If you kill one person, you can hang if found guilty by an Indian court. However, animals who make it their business to murder helpless men, women and children in hundreds get sentenced to a few years in prison. And I am sure, as the governments change they will be sprung out of the prison by their political colleagues in exchange for support for the prevailing government.

Does this mean that in India, so long as you murder in hundreds, it is okay.

This is a travesty of justice. My opinion -- hang them without mercy -- all of them, those involved in conspiring and those involved in perpetuating these henious crimes. If these people want to fight the government, we have a ballot box.

Prasad Gopinath

From: Prasad Gopinath <prasad@centrenet.on.ca>
Date sent: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 20:20:35 -0800

BJP is nothing but Congress B

Sir,

As days go by, one thing is becoming more and more clear. BJP is nothing but another clone of Congress, a Congress B. The party does not practicise democracy within its ranks. The party hierarchy is crowded with people who are their only for power. BJP has no specific programme to offer the country other than building a Temple at the site of Babri Masjid.

I was one of those people who was sold on the oratory of L K Advani. I fully support the dismantling of the Babri Masjid and a building of a Temple there. I also support the liberation of the temple at Banares and Dwaraka. However, a nation cannot be run on the basis of liberating temples. BJP, like other parties in India has no programme to help India or Indians. They have one definite agenda - GRAB POWER and HOLD ON TO IT AT ANY COST.

It is most unfortunate that a party with wide support among Hindus cannot put together a programme for the reformation of our society. If the BJP wants to do things there is plenty to do even without being in power.