Aluthgama and going beyond the black and white of vilification

Ask anyone the question ‘Are you a racist?’ and the answer would be ‘no’.  You can replace racist with communalist, fundamentalist, extremist, chauvinist or any other derogatory term and you’ll get the same answer.  ‘No’.  You can ask ‘Are you arrogant, jealous, wicked, deceitful etc etc’ and you will still get ‘no’.  No one ever does anything wrong.  Act and word are generally justified to self beforehand.  Arrogance tends to trump humility.  And the world stays as it is apart from appearances and frills of the times. 

Right here in Sri Lanka, we had what are called ethnic-tensions.  That should be in the present tense.  There are also tensions between followers of different faiths. There is apprehension, fear and distrust.  And there is response to these; response to the real and imagined, histories and extrapolations.  And it’s mostly of the ‘Us vs Them’ kind.  More precisely it’s mostly ‘We are the victims, they are the aggressors’. 

A few weeks ago, when ‘Aluthgama’ happened, there was not just condemnation of the Bodu Bala Sena, but a tagging of all Buddhists to exercises of censure.  There was absolutely no mention of Welipenna where Muslims attacked a Buddha statue and houses and establishments owned by Buddhists.  There was footage of Buddhists ‘on the rampage’ but carefully edited out was footage of Muslim youth throwing stones from the roof of a building.  No one asked the question, ‘how did stones get there?’  The fact is that there was premeditation on both sides, perhaps out of fear, but that’s a different story.  The story is that there were stories and people chose what to pick and what to ignore. 

The Buddhist response, if you want to call it that, was similar.  Pick and choose is the name of the game.  Footage of Welipenna and weeping Buddhist women, but none of the Muslim shops and houses attacked or the associated lamentations; footage of stone-throwing Muslim youth, but not of attack-mode Buddhists. 

It was all overshadowed by ‘Gaza’.  The condemnation of Israel was absolute.  Very few Muslims criticized Hamas.  There’s no question about it, the Israeli ‘response’ (bad word because it presumes innocence and victimhood and edits out known aggression on the part of Israel) is genocidal in intent and product.  What’s interesting is that even those who footnoted Hamas remained absolutely silent on Muslim-Muslim violence. 

Ali A Rizvi, in an article published in www.huffingtonpost.com titled ‘7 Things to Consider Before Choosing Sides in the Middle East Conflict,’ gives us some sobering facts.

‘Bashar al-Assad has killed over 180,000 Syrians, mostly Muslim, in two years -- more than the number killed in Palestine in two decades. Thousands of Muslims in Iraq and Syria have been killed by ISIS in the last two months. Tens of thousands have been killed by the Taliban. Half a million black Muslims were killed by Arab Muslims in Sudan. The list goes on.  But Gaza makes Muslims around the world, both Sunni and Shia, speak up in a way they never do otherwise. Up-to-date death counts and horrific pictures of the mangled corpses of Gazan children flood their social media timelines every day.’

Ali asks some pertinent questions: ‘If it was just about the numbers, wouldn’t the other conflicts take precedence? What is it about then?’

The anger of Muslims regarding Israeli aggression is understandable.  That anger and solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza even prompted some people to commend the unity of Muslims.  Ali’s piece shows that underneath anti-Israeli sentiment are deep fissures.  If the harm done to others in the community prompts umbrage, though, what can explain the near total silence on Muslim aggression against Muslims?  Is it something on the following lines: ‘outsiders need not worry about matters within the family’?  But is there any debate within ‘the family’? 

On the other side, we see Israel’s allies, especially the USA and Britain showing utter disregard for the atrocities committed by Israel.  The support has been absolute.  Scandalous would be a kind word in this context especially since these countries are self-proclaimed champions of human rights. 

What is the logic of this black-white logic?  It is an inevitable outcome of a preference for Cartesian logic?  Well, from that point to sweeping statement and castigating of collectives for the perceived crimes of a few is a very short distance.

Not too long ago, Prageeth Ekneligoda (‘disappeared’ they say), came up with a powerful cartoon.  Now Prageeth is powerful when he uses lines, although his commentary borders on pornography and his political practice (sending human ash to perceived enemies) even laughable.  But take a look at the caricature he offers. There’s a Buddhist bikkhu being ‘creative’ with the dharmachakra, subtly turning it into the Swastika, the sign that has come to represent fascism.  So all of a sudden we are not talking of some fringe group but the entire Buddhist order.  That’s offensive.  Avantha Attygalle, another brilliant cartoonist also does himself much disservice by playing with iconography in similarly careless, crass and sweeping manner. 

When an entire collective is thus vilified, one has to expect the majority to be offended.  But strangely, in Sri Lanka, Buddhists are supposed to ‘grin and bear’ because Buddhism after all is about non-attachment.  Non-Buddhists regularly preach Buddhism to Buddhists even as Buddhists are vilified.  They do not, likewise, ask Christians to turn the other cheek or direct Muslims to non-violent, compassionate and change-cheek type of content in the Quran. 

Those who share and even use Prageeth’s caricature as Facebook profile pictures do not see anything wrong in it.  Would they feel offended if their faiths are subjected to similar caricature?  History, after all, is full of blood-letting by Christians and Muslims, in the name of God, Allah, Jesus Christ and Prophet Muhammed.  US President’s bless troops thus: ‘May god bless the United States of America’.  That’s just before they are sent to kill people.  Non-Christians.  How many Christians have the United States of America killed in the past 10 years and how many non-Christians?  The ratio will tell a story.  Is it correct to paint all Muslims with ISIS colors?  Are all Muslims supporters of Hamas?  Is objection of Zionism qualification enough for the label ‘Jihadist’?  Is objection to the hate speech of Bodu Bala Sena by a Muslims good enough reason to call him/her a Jihadist? 

But would it be right to paint all Christians and Muslims as fascists?  Would Christians and Muslims be offended? 

There are questions we don’t like to hear and are very reluctant to answer, aren’t there?  But if we looked deep enough within and in the doctrines we’ve chosen to guide us, there’s ample content to provoke self-appraisal, inculcate patience and see self in enemy and vice versa.  The problem is that it’s hard work.   Caricature is far easier.  Mobs are attractive.  Safety in numbers, unfortunately, also amounts to offering blank checks to the movers and shakers of number-aggregates and they typically are black-white creatures who perceive any self-criticism as ill-affordable weakness. 

These are mob days.  Collective days. Days of arrogance.  These are days of treating Cartesian frames of logic to be superior to anything else, never mind the fact that they are full of holes and have functioned as justifiers and approvers of all kinds of crimes against humanity. 

Debating is easy because debating points are cheap.  It gives ego a fillip.  Neither cause nor the greater good of humanity gets a boost, in the long run.  If we stop to think about it, that is. 

‘Hate speech’ is an easily tossed around term these days.  It’s something ‘others’ do, everyone thinks.  There’s a reason why there’s at least that kind of ‘agreement’.  Human sloth.  Identity-fascination.  Chauvinism, disguised and undisguised.  We could do better but have not.  And that’s something to worry about. 

Read more

What is the color of racism?

‘Before you speak let your words pass through three gates. At the first gate, ask yourself ‘is it true?’ At second, ask yourself ‘is it necessary?’ And at the third, ask yourself ‘is it kind?’ – Sufi saying.

Social media is for some a stress reliever. Facebook and Twitter are sounding boards for some and for others Agony Aunts or even shrinks. That’s at the personal level. There is by definition a social element to it too of course. That’s why there are groups, followers and followed on these sites. 

Social media is not all that it is claimed to be and neither is it the nothing that others claim it to be. Has its uses, has its pitfalls. It steps in when mainstream media steps back and this is a good thing. The flip side is that even as there are responsible posts where people don’t say ‘any old thing’ there are utterly irresponsible statements made without verification and without corroboration. These are re-posted and re-tweeted as though it’s all fact.

It is argued that the lie gets called quite fast in social media. This is true. It’s faster of course than in mainstream media such as newspapers. On the other hand not everyone on Facebook and Twitter are actually listening to the counter-argument, there being enough people who dismiss any counter to believed ‘truth’ as conspiracy, lie, obfuscation etc. Moreover, within ‘groups’ (of all ‘faiths’) the counterpoint is absent. 

By and large the in-your-face commentator intent on thrusting his or her opinion down your throat is easily recognizable. They win the day, most days, but sometimes one wonders if it is they that are mostly to blame for hardening of positions, the whipping up of racial hatred and the sweeping vilification of an entire collective for the crimes of a few. 

‘Aluthgama’ generated horror and disgust, condemnation and fear, excuses and justification, accusation and counter-accusation. There was also sanity. There were the pragmatists who got down to the hard and not fashionable matter of providing relief to the displaced. There were others who pleaded for restraint, patience and calm. ‘It should not be allowed to spread, things should not get worse,’ they argued even as others were indulging in wild claims such as ‘It’s 1983 all over again’ not as warning (legitimate) but as fact (erroneous). 

And quite reminiscent of the profile pictures that many picked up during the agitation by FUTA (Federation of University Teachers’ Associations) where the legend ‘6%’became signature statement of position, many changed their profile picture to ‘Stand Against Racism’ or versions of this sentiment. We will get to that presently.

There was also an FB post with a link to John Lennon’s ‘Imagine’, that all time favorite of anti-war demonstrators and other peace activists who promote non-violence. The lines are lovely: ‘Imagine there’s no countries, it isn’t hard to do; nothing to kill or die for and no religion too.’ What’s interesting, though, is that those who sing that song and spread the sentiment around aren’t putting their money where their mouths are. There’s never been a note accompanying such posts of the following kind: ‘I hereby drop my religion, I will hereafter be faithless and I denounce country, race and all other identifiers of collectivity’. So it is almost as though they want others to drop their religion while keeping their own faith. 

Another, more subtle, version of the same hypocrisy was evident on FB. There were people who changed their profile picture to an image of a hand with a tiny map of Sri Lanka in the middle. It was the classic ‘No!’ sign, fingers spread out. The caption was ‘Stand against racism’. The trick is in the color. The background was yellow, clearly the color associated with Buddhism and Buddhists. What’s the subliminal message here? Buddhists are racists (extremists, religious fundamentalists, what have you?)? 

There is blanket dismissal and vilification here of an entire collective. It was picked up by many, Buddhists included, one has to assume more in innocence than with any conspiratorial intent. It is doubtful that Muslims who put this image up were all thinking ‘Buddhists and only Buddhists are “racist”’. But you can’t get around the assumptions embedded in the color-choice. Not only are all Buddhists vilified, there is a simultaneous claim that Buddhists and Buddhists alone are to blame. No one else. The facts on the ground rebel against this position. No, it is not that Buddhists and Muslims are equally to blame, but no one is entirely blameless here. Provocation and violence were not the preserve of ‘Buddhists’. So is it that ‘Racism by Buddhists’ (shouldn’t it be religious intolerance and not ‘racism’?) is the only kind of ‘racism’ people are ready to object to?

Interestingly some who preferred the yellow-sign are also people who not too long ago said ‘don’t conflate LTTE and “Tamil”’ (even as they said ‘The LTTE is the sole-representative of the Tamil people’). We see an easy slip from BBS to ‘Sinhala Buddhist’ and to ‘Sinhala Buddhist State’ and ‘Sinhala Buddhist hegemony’, almost like how ‘Buddhists’ were ready with petrol and matchbox to meet ‘stone-throw provocation’. It’s a habit, then? 

There’s sanity too, fortunately. Azmeer Mohamed had put up a ‘Stand against racism’ profile pic. It had yellow and it had green. Chameera Dedduwage has the same profile picture. That’s rising above it all. One might objection to the proportional split considering the fact that it was the Muslims who had to bear the brunt of the violence – it would be a travesty of justice to say ‘both communities suffered’ when in fact what the Muslims suffered dwarfs what Buddhists did, but still, it’s better than the blanket dismissal of single-color (mis)representation. 

There are no all-green signs, by the way. There is nothing to stop anyone from going for a neutral background color. White, for example. 

But why quibble about a color, one might ask, when there are shops being burnt and when Muslims legitimately feel threatened? Well, there’s no reason to go overboard in any direction. Whatever is done should help because the slightest slight can make things dramatically worse. 

These are not easy times. Frayed tempers, perceived grievances, real threats and real fears are all elements that can cloud and blow away reason. This is the hour or the rumor-monger. This is the hour of the extremist. This is the hour of the passionate. This is therefore the hour when reason must ‘come to the party’. Big time. And there has to be reason in both the big and the small. A spark, after all, is not of gigantic proportion. 

Azmeer Mohamed gives a clue. He posted the Sufi saying quoted above. Azmeer Mohamed asks himself ‘is it true, necessary and kind?’ It cannot hurt to follow his example.  


Related Articles:

The Muslim in me
Aluthgama must be arrested
The IGP must resign

Read more

The IGP must resign!*

These are days of frayed tempers, perceived grievances, real threats and real fears that can cloud and blow away reason.  This is the hour or the rumor-monger.  This is the hour of the extremist.  This is the hour of the passionate and irresponsible. 

The word on the street is ‘Aluthgama’.  Indeed it is the word on every street where matters of yesterday, today and tomorrow, matters of the nation and its destiny, matters of unrest and fear and other related matters are discussed.  Aluthgama moved from the Kalutara district to Colombo and Badulla.  ‘This is 83-July all over again,’ some said.  Not true, but we could get there. 

There were arguments over who threw the first stone, as though it justified throw-return and more.  After all it is hard to pin it down to first stone cast when there were only a handful of STF men to ‘protect the (BBS) procession’ in Dharga Town.  STF personnel were clearly confused because their orders were specific.   One source explained thus: ‘The Muslims keep saying that the STF sided with the mob.  We didn’t.  We were acting on our orders which were specific and were about protecting the procession.’  

It was not, let us repeat, not a peaceful procession.  There were anti-Muslim slogans, there was whipping of hysteria, there was undisguised inciting of violence against Muslims in a Muslim majority area by people who had petrol cans and carried weapons. Literally minutes after that ‘first stone’ Muslims and Muslim-owned premises were attacked and torched in Adhikarigoda, Aluthgama and the interior of Dharga Town. 

Most of all, it is hard to pin it down on first stone when Buddhist monks torched a shopping complex in Aluthgama more than a month ago over an alleged molestation of a Buddhist child by a Muslim, the relative of the shop owner, when in fact CCTV evidence disproved the allegation. The shop was torched only several days later. 

Blaming first-stone-thrower is therefore a joke.

There are questions which are not funny, though.  If Azath Salley was arrested for ‘hate speech’, why is Rev Galagodaaththe Gnanasaara still free?  Why did the Police not prevent the BBS rally despite many pleas to do so from many quarters (a planned ‘BBS’ rally in Mawanella was stopped, after all)?  Why was the STF not ordered to maintain peace but instructed only to ‘protect the procession’?  Why didn’t the police stop armed mobs scurrying around with clubs and violent intent (not just in Aluthgama on Sunday but elsewhere too thereafter)?  

Most importantly, why did the Inspector General of Police N.K. Ilangakoon state that a Buddhist monk had been assaulted when he had no evidence to support the claim?  The Judicial Medical Officer’s report which would have either proven or refuted the said monk’s claim (as of Friday) has not been issued.  Highly placed sources at the Attorney General’s Office could not confirm that the monk had indeed been assaulted. 

If there was convoluted justification of last Sunday’s violence and if justification spurred further violence the blame falls squarely on the IGP for making the following (irresponsible) statement: ‘Three Muslims in a trishaw assaulted the driver and the Buddhist monk. The Buddhist monk was in hospital receiving treatment for two days and then discharged.  He was to be taken to the temple in a procession when the incident occurred.’ 

The IGP offered speculation as fact. That’s incompetent and irresponsible. Yesterday the Muslim-owned ‘No Limit’ outlet in Panadura was torched.  While it is not clear how it all happened, it is clear that the sequence of events prompt people to connect dots and reach conclusion, wrong though they may be.  Tinkering with the truth and lying outright causes friction, throw out sparks and cause infernos that are hard to put out.

It is wrong to blame it all on one person, but it is equally wrong not to point out those who provided fuel and matchstick, tossed in extra firewood and refused to douse it even though they had all the water necessary to do the job.  We have to take issue with the IGP.  He must resign forthwith.

 

*Editorial, 'The Nation', June 22, 2014

** See also 
'Aluthgama' needs to be arrested
The Muslim in me
The bigger thing is to keep matchstick in matchbox

msenevira@gmail.com 

Read more

‘Aluthgama’ needs to be arrested forthwith

The Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) holds a rally following an ‘incident’.  A second, more violent incident follows.  That’s an easy line to draw, i.e. from BBS to violence.  It holds.  The language, the whipping up of emotions, creation and/or exacerbation of apprehensions regarding another community do not add up to prthagjanas reverting to the foundational tenets, especially wisdom and compassion, or the inhabiting of the sathara brahma viharana (compassion, kindness, equanimity and rejoicing in another’s joys) but produce a quick slide to besieged mentality, persecution mania and the adaptation of ‘attack is the best form of defence’ thinking. 

What are the ‘facts’ that we have here?  There’s the ‘incident’ where it is claimed that a Muslim person had hit a bikkhu. Claiming is easy and this side of arahathood anyone, bikkhus included, can transgress precepts, including the fourth, the commitment not to utter falsehood).  Not only are things lost in narration, lots get added on too in the process. A disagreement becomes dispute, dispute becomes argument, argument raises voices, raised voices lead to in-your-face closeness, proximity tends to contact, contact is read as aggressive touch, touch is blow, and blow is assault.  What happens between two human beings is then an altercation between two persons from two communities, religious communities, that is.

The fact is that neither party can offer anything to conclusively prove their case.  So they go to the Police.  What can the police do?  If the police are impartial, the police will weigh evidence and let the law take its course, either towards dismissal or indictment. The police, since it is also tasked to maintain peace, will take precautions to ensure that tempers are kept in check. 

The Police may have done the best they could but ‘the best’ clearly has been inadequate.  Muslims have been attacked in Alutgama. Houses and shops have been torched.  The BBS rally could have been stopped (others have been on numerous occasions, after all).  Outfits like the BBS thrives on ‘flash-points’ and are not averse to creating ‘flash-points’ which can be exploited.  The ‘democratic’ argument; right to assemble, right to express opinion etc; is thin given histories that the Police and higher authorities are clearly not ignorant about. 

It’s so easy to slide on the matter of ‘faith’.   Someone says ‘I was hit’ and those who hear that will see robe and bikkhu, will see ‘Muslim’ and not another human being, will not stop and ask ‘is that true?’ and will not let the law deal with it.  And when the law does deal with it, even in clumsy ways, if the ‘decision’ is perceived as ‘unfair’, there is frustration. The police and the government have not helped at all.  There have been countless instances in these types of situations as well as in regular policing matters where the law has been a politician’s plaything and police officers turned into hapless implementers of orders ‘from above’.  

In this context Buddhists will say (as they have – check FB posts) that the Government is turning a blind eye on ‘Islamic Extremism’ and Muslims will say (as they have) that this is a  ‘Sinhala Buddhist state’ with tacit approval of ‘Extremist Buddhist outfits’ and their attacks on Muslims and Muslim establishments.  Both parties can cite innumerable instances of ‘government support’ to the ‘other’.  Buddhists will say ‘Kuragala’ and Muslims could point to state-run media outfits that have blown the Aluthgama incident way out of proportion, claiming that political mileage was being sought by stating as established fact what is, as of now, nothing more than an allegation, that of a bikkhu being attacked by a Muslim (whether or not religion was part of it is of course not even footnoted!).

Part of the reason is this whole ‘besieged’ discourse that is gaining ground across all communities based on identity, regardless whether they constitute the majority or are a minority.  Identity assertion is not illegal.  Sometimes it is not a matter of pride; it is a communal assertion that seeks safety from perceived threat.  Sometimes it is defiance.  Somewhere in this assertion business there is also a thread of threat. 

Be that as it may, the ground that is made uneven and therefore made for tripping in multiple ways, is clearly a product of a break down in the entire institutional arrangement pertaining to law and order.  It has made it possible for anyone to stake high moral ground claiming persecution and complicity of the police in the pernicious designs of the ‘other’. 

For this, no one is to blame, but all relevant individuals and bodies in the government. 

If the Government does nothing, then we are in a serious situation.  However, even if the Government does nothing, it does not follow that the people should twiddle their thumbs.  If ‘faith’ is at the center of these disturbing developments, then it would not be out or order to seek in ‘faith’ the appropriate response.

No doctrine needs defense.  Political positions require defense, political organizations can claim that defense is necessary. Attack will be an easy option in the matter of defending these things.  Organizations have their membership made of the like-minded. They rarely listed to advise from outsiders (why should they?).  But not all Buddhists are members of the BBS and not all Buddhists support the BBS. 

There is legitimate fear on the part of Muslims.  No amount of assurances from the government or the police or the neighbors would succeed in removing these fears completely.  It is necessary however for Buddhists to talk to their Muslim neighbors. It is not about saying sorry for crimes committed in their name by people they don’t even know or whose actions they did not and would not support.  All that needs to be done is to say ‘I will not do this and I will do my best to stop anyone from doing anything like this to you or your family, my friend’.    

It is not easy to argue with a mob, but I have seen individuals standing up to mobs.  Reason, compassion, determination and everything else that one obtained or is strengthened by faith, will do it. 

Aluthgama is a metaphor for a lot of things. A lot of things we really can do without.  For this reason Aluthgama needs to be arrested forthwith, if not by the Government then by the decent, civilized, law-abiding citizens of this country, whatever their faith.

Read more