Akanksha Singh, Chelsea Clinton and the Christchurch atrocity

Islamophobia had received a huge blow, globally, because of the Christchurch atrocity. Then some 'woke' student activists decided to go after a heavily pregnant Chelsea Clinton- making out she was responsible. Suddenly Trump Jr. gets to look a little less reptilian because he is speaking up for her.

I am tempted to see something sinister in the manner in which the Media has chosen to highlight the silly comments of excitable youngsters so as to give Islamophobia- which easily turns into good old fashioned xenophobia- a new lease of life just when it was on the defensive.

Consider this article in the Independent by Akanksha Singh- presumably a Briton of Sikh origin. Her ancestors' co-religionists ethnically cleansed Muslims and were ethnically cleansed by Muslims during Partition. It is doubtful that the people doing the killing, or who were getting killed, had much 'Western Education'.

Yet the title of her article is 'Western education has a lot to answer for when it comes to the Christchurch attack'. How could this possibly be true? There have been mosques in the West since the 1880s. However, there were no attacks of this type till 2016. One shooting was in Switzerland, the other in Canada and there was also an attempted attack with a van in London. Clearly, Western education could not have suddenly changed so that such attacks began happening.

By contrast, attacks by Pakistani origin Muslims and Indian origin Sikhs on Mosques and Gurudwaras, belonging to 'heretical' sects', have been regular occurrences since the Seventies. It would be absurd to suggest this has to do with 'Western Education'.

The mass shootings at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, that killed 50 people weren’t different.

Fair enough. There is a trend here from 2016 onward. However, prior to that, there was an attack on a Gurdwara in Wisconsin by a nutter who, presumably, thought only Muslims wore turbans.

They weren’t different because the attacker had a manifesto outlining his depraved beliefs, they weren’t different because they happened at the hands of a white man in New Zealand, and they certainly weren’t different because they were streamed live from his phone.

 If they weren't different from any other attack then Western Education has nothing to answer for. It is wholly irrelevant.

As a society, we seem to consistently distinguish Islamic extremism from “other” extremism.

Yes. Sikh extremism is indeed distinguished from Islamic extremism because it targets Brown, not White people. Thus a Canadian politician is quite happy to cuddle up with a Sikh terrorist while he may be less anxious to snuggle with a guy who wants to chop his head off.

Truthfully, however, there is no “other” when it comes to extremes; there is no religion, no logic, and, indeed, no compassion.

This is nonsense. We treat guys who want to kill us differently from guys who want to kill the guys who want to kill us. Religion is about not killing people of the same sect. In practice, however much it speaks of 'turning the other cheek' or 'Ahimsa', it fucks up guys who want to fuck with it or else it runs away.

So, when the attacker – a self-proclaimed “regular white man” from Australia – declared he was carrying out the attack to “directly reduce immigration rates to European lands by intimidating and physically removing the invaders themselves”, I didn’t just see a xenophobic, white supremacist ideology; I saw someone who was ignorant and poorly educated.

If he was ignorant and poorly educated then why blame 'Western Education'?

There’s a reason that racists and xenophobes are comfortable with the idea of an “invasion” by immigrants, refugees, or people of colour – western education has, time and again, fuelled white supremacy and, consequently, Islamophobia.

Nobody wants to be 'invaded'. Why? Because invaders fuck you up and take all the cool stuff you own. Racism and Xenophobia exist wholly independently of Education- Western or otherwise. The Chinese are throwing Uighur Muslims into concentration camps. This isn't because Western Education has fueled Han supremacy and consequently, Islamophobia.

Hours after the Christchurch terror attack, three white men attacked a man outside a mosque in east London. They called worshippers attending Friday prayers “terrorists” and assaulted one such worshipper with a hammer and a batten.

 Hours after the Christchurch terror attack, I ordered a pizza. I recognized the delivery guy and recalled he had a relative in New Zealand. Thankfully, this cousin lived in Wellington, but he had friends who had lost loved ones. I mentioned an old friend who settled there and started a family. He passed away a few years back- before Facebook- but I couldn't help thinking of his family. Were they safe? We condoled with each other though we were from different countries and religions. I imagine this sort of thing was happening all over the world.

Back when I studied GCSE history, we covered a lot of ground, but what we didn’t cover in nearly enough detail was colonialism. It was mentioned in a paragraph, to be sure, but then we brushed it aside and focused on the wars and all the great things Britain gave the world.

Colonialism in India put an end to internecine warfare in Akanksha's ancestral Punjab. It was the reason her ancestors could spread out and succeed as farmers and soldiers and then lawyers, doctors, Professors etc. Sikhism itself benefited from British Colonial policies. However, the departure of the British created a terrible tragedy for the majority of Sikhs who lost their lands and had to seek safe havens in East Punjab- which was ethnically cleansed of Muslims.

I think writer and politician Shashi Tharoor perhaps said it best when he described this cultural phenomenon as “historical amnesia”.

Shashi Tharoor has joined a dynastic political party which first inflicted 'Operation Bluestar' upon the Sikhs. Indira Gandhi ordered her soldiers, not just to enter a place of worship and start shooting, she ordered them to subject the holiest shrine of the Sikh Religion to mortar shelling and a full scale military assault. A short while later, thousands of Sikhs were massacred in New Delhi itself. Nobody was prosecuted. Akanksha's 'historical amnesia' is greater even than Tharoor's.

But this isn’t unique to British curricula.

What isn't unique? 'Historical amnesia'? But Akanksha has that in a more extreme form. Is she a curriculum of some sort?

60,000 years of Aboriginal history are ignored in Australia, with history textbooks still implying that Australia is white.

It is majority white- as is plain and obvious to the naked eye.

And America and Canada, too, where Native American and First Nation history is but a small component of what is learnt.

What good would learning Native American history do? In any case, they are a tiny minority.  I can imagine Canadian or American parents agreeing that more Chinese history should be taught because China is increasingly important. Since Africa is likely to become increasingly important in the second half of this century, I can imagine that modern African history will be a popular elective option.

Education which is not useful is pushed out of the curriculum by parents- who are also voters. Attempts to buck the trend fail because once people see that a PhD in Sioux studies only gets you a job flipping burgers.

Of course, this is changing in some parts of the world (albeit slowly), but until these curricula serve to be more than propaganda for how great the allied powers were, they’re not of much use.

Use to whom? Akanksha? Shashi Tharoor? But they are both useless simply. They can derive a small rent writing worthless article. However, Punjabis and Malyallees know that a PhD in History or I.R is a waste of time. STEM subjects are the way to go. Tharoor could make a little money for himself. Had he got a STEM subject PhD, he could have helped create a Knowledge based Enterprise employing thousands on high salaries.

Along with history, though, we need to look at the language and rhetoric we use to describe ourselves before we delve into whom we confine to the “outsider” label.

Nonsense! How potential employers or investors or friends and family describe  me matters. I can claim to be smart and sexy all I like. Everybody else describes me as a tosser.

True, a bunch of tossers can get together and decide that 'hotties' are 'outsiders' but this just proves they are tosser. If a 'hottie' deigns to give one of them the time of day, the tosser will defect from the in-group.

Several individuals who have fanned the flames of modern-day Islamophobia are in denial over the extent to which commentary like theirs can lead to terrorist attacks.

Rubbish! They are very pleased. They can now pose as the voice of moderation.

Donald Trump denies white nationalism is a ‘rising threat’ after Christchurch mosque attack.

It isn't a rising threat- to him.  He might get a second term- and thus stay of jail for a bit longer- if there are more such attacks. But only provided the loony left shits the bed as spectacularly as this-

When two New York University students confronted Chelsea Clinton at a vigil for the victims of the Christchurch attack, they suggested that Clinton’s criticism of black Muslim representative Ilhan Omar were part of the problem.

Chelsea Clinton was a kid when her Dad became President. There's a lot of residual good-will towards her- especially coz she is pregnant. Why go after her, now of all times?

True, Rose Asaf is Jewish- but there is no reason to believe she is insincere in her beliefs.

I guess, the truth is 'Western Education' in shite subjects like Political Science makes people stoooopid.

In a video, student Rose Asaf is heard saying, “This right here is the result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words you put out into the world. And I want you to know that, and I want you to feel that deep inside. Forty-nine people died because of the rhetoric that you put out there.”

I didn't know Chelsea had said anything. Most people, even in America, were unaware of her tweets. How was this crazy 'poorly educated' Australian supposed to have been poisoned by 'the rhetoric' she 'put out there'?

Clinton, who replied to a tweet on antisemitism in response to Omar’s tweet accusing US leaders of defending Israel for financial gain, said she “co-signed as an American”. Adding: “We should expect all elected officials, regardless of party, and all public figures to not traffic in antisemitism.”

What is wrong with that? Chelsea is American. She is saying America has a strategic interest in Israel just as it has a strategic interest in propping up Sisi in Egypt or the Crown Prince in Saudi Arabia.

Dweik and Asaf rightly pointed out that the words “as an American” were what were hugely problematic, pointing out that they believed “that Ilhan Omar did nothing wrong except challenge the status quo, but the way many people chose to criticise Omar made her vulnerable to anti-Muslim hatred and death threats.” Moreover, in an interview with The Washington Post, Asaf said that by using “as an American” Clinton reinforces the “anti-immigrant trope”.

Hilary Clinton reinforced the 'anti-immigrant trope' when she told European leaders to curb migration or else lose to populists. Too late, she realized that curbs on migration are essential to protect the living standards of the working class.

The attack on Chelsea shows that the Christchurch atrocity must not be allowed to change the anti-migrant, anti-Muslim, trajectory in Liberal Democracies. The days of 'multi-culti' are well and truly over. As for 'Students' studying shite subjects, jack up their fees and make them cross-subsidize STEM subject research.

The stupidity these kids are displaying makes it more, not less, likely that the Supreme Court will overturn 'Sullivan vs. New York Times' so people who say 'Chelsea is responsible for terrorism' can get their asses sued to oblivion. It seems being 'woke' is a gift that keeps giving- to the other side.

Akshanka, with her vaunted History GCSE (an exam you pass when you are 15 or 15) takes a different view-

And they’re right.
So when Clinton responded with the ultimate non-apology, “I’m so sorry you feel that way [...] I do believe words matter,” I couldn’t help but recognise the extent to which people with platforms are making matters worse.

'No platforming' nutjobs are the one's who fucked up here. They turned a moment when Islamophobia was at its weakest into an opportunity to garner a little publicity by attacking a pregnant woman well loved by older people who remember the Clinton era as a golden era of prosperity and peak American power.

This isn’t unique to Clinton though. Julia Hartley-Brewer criticised Nesrine Malik for pointing out that her criticisms of Islam and Islamic terrorists were “somehow responsible for today’s horrific mosque terror attacks”.
But they were.

Rubbish. Australians have never heard of either of these two Pommy journalists. To be frank, I hadn't either. They are not responsible for anything because nobody gives a toss about them. Only an even more obscure Pommy journalist would pretend otherwise. Notice all these people are women. Do they really believe that macho Ozzie males care what Pommy women say?

The rhetoric put out by people like Hartley-Brewer is what white supremacists feed off. Despite calling the Christchurch attacks “right-wing” and “terrorist”, Australian prime minister Scott Morrison has also relied on anti-Muslim rhetoric as a political strategy to secure his position.

Makes sense. However, lets not forget anti-Politically Correct or anti-Zionist or anti-Patriarchy type rhetoric. They all gained salience because of the stupidity and mindless viciousness of the other side.

Ditto Donald Trump, whose anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies were praised in the Christchurch attacker’s manifesto, calling Trump “a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose”.

But only because Chelsea Clinton and some British radio journalist I'd never heard off brainwashed the poor fellow. However, even Chelsea's culpability pales in comparison to that of 'Western Education'. By contrast Trump is an innocent man and his son is just being chivalrous in coming to the defense of a pregnant lady who used to live in his Daddy's new House.

There’s enough research to suggest we aren’t born racist – we learn it.

The same research would suggest we aren't born at all- we learn how to come into the world as members of the human race. Who do we learn it from?

Perhaps from a racist uncle or grandparent, say. Perhaps from the man down the road who tells women in headscarves to “go home”.

So, racism isn't taught by 'Western Education' rather it is done by a grandparent or guy down the road who tells the Queen, Gor' bless 'er, to go home and put on her crown rather than traipse around in a Hermes head scarf.

Politicians, journalists and public figures have hugely influential platforms.

Akshankaka is a journalist and the Independent has given her a platform. Is she hugely influential? Only in a negative way. We think she is an idiot and whatever cause she is espousing is mischievous simply.

Maybe, as a Sikh, she wants to encourage Islamophobia. But this would be a foolish thing to do coz there's no way of telling Sikhs or Hindus apart from Muslims. Why not write sensibly instead?

And until they can fully grasp the extent to which they control public discourse surrounding issues such as immigration and xenophobia, and Islamophobia and white supremacy, as a public, we need to hold them accountable wherever possible.

I am holding Akshkankaka accountable for this worthless shite. Will she care? Of course not. There's no point holding anybody to account unless you have some power to sanction that person. I suppose I could gain a little power if I did not write like an illiterate baboon but, what to do?, Iyers are like that only. If you want something well written and sensible go to an Iyengar. But not Amia Srinivasan coz she's had a little too much 'Western Education'. Anyway, that's why I hate Iyengars and call for their overthrow and destruction. This is important

Because words of hate or intolerance – however mild – don’t just hurt those they’re intended for, they empower closet xenophobes and reiterate white supremacist beliefs, too.

In other words, my words of hate and intolerance are having some actual impact on the world.

Is this a reasonable view?

No. Words don't count. If I were capable of doing something useful, maybe people would listen to me. Then, I might be able to harm others by some irrational or incautious remark of mine. But, people who write silly articles aren't doing anything useful. At the margin, they may cause a back-lash, but because there are other people belonging to vulnerable groups who carry on doing useful stuff, the back-lash too will soon run out of steam.