From: trivedi@curie.uchicago.edu (Anil Trivedi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Yet more excerpts
Date: 12 Apr 92 20:13:27 GMT
Organization: Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago.

In article <Idu8Q1C00VB=N8ylAV@andrew.cmu.edu> "Arun K. Gupta" <ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>Re: Muslim Situation in India
>
>I would like to point out that Mohammed Nejatullah Siddiqui, whose
>credentials are : Professor of Economics in a university in Saudi
>Arabia, is, as far as I know, an Indian. If you read closely, you
>would see that he was formerly of Aligarh Muslim University. In
>any case, he is no more responsible for what goes in Saudi Arabia
>than you, dear reader, are for what goes on in the U.S. (if you
>are not a citizen of the U.S. , that is.)


An Indian Muslim, financed by the Saudis, writing from Saudi Arabia,
is lecturing to all of us about the virtues not practised by those
financing him. That matters in real life, in the middle of an already
heated situation. You are over-defending: I do NOT hold him "responsible"
for what is going on in Saudi Arabia. But I DO question his credibility.

Look around. IN REAL LIFE, NOTHING WILL DESTROY YOUR CREDIBILITY FASTER
THAN HOBNOBBING WITH THOSE WHO BLATANTLY VIOLATE THE VALUES THAT YOU 
INTEND TO PREACH. I am sorry but that's the way life is. (It is not
merely LIVING in Saudi Arabia; this man is no "dissident" there.)

About you and me in U.S.:
We are free to comment on anything but we should be prepared that
our CREDIBILITY too will depend upon the details and the circumstances.
In the Hindu-Muslim debate, U.S. is essentially a neutral place.
However, if you were working for the Union Carbide, citizen or not,
and lecturing your fellow citizens back home on environmental
responsibility, it may not go over very smoothly.  :-)


>I would like to ask people like Anil Trivedi and Kuram T.
>Narayana -- Which Muslims do you want to deal with, if not
>these? 

If I were a Hindu leader (which I am definitely not!) organizing
the kind of dialog I proposed, I will NOT try to choose the
spokespeople for the other side: THAT is the whole point. 

I will deal with whoever I have to. I have no problem DEALING
with anyone merely because he has a differing viewpoint: in fact,
that it what we MUST do. 

However, I cannot suspend my judgement: Some people will seem
more credible than others. Some will inspire more respect than
others. (Even so I will DEAL with anyone who came along!)


>Anil Trivedi wrote advice to the Muslims of India -- don't
>deal with just the people you like, that's a mistake.

That was because there were too many phrases like "sane Hindus"
"forward-thinking Hindus" etc. You run the risk of talking to
discredited, politically lightweight, chamcha types.

>Yet, the intense dislike and unwillingness to listen to
>the authors I've posted here, is so intensely clear 

Shake out of it; you could not be more wrong. I do not dislike 
the man: I will gladly go to his house house for dinner if he 
invited me! I am not unwilling to listen to him: I read each
one of his words many times over; I will be happy to hash all
this out in person day and night, if I had the opportunity.

However, I will expect him to understand that I am not a chamcha
type who would merely be quoting HIM to everyone. I have lived
and thought for quite a while and I have my own perspective
which seems to differ from his. 

Initially at least, I will be suspicious of his credibility on
THIS one issue (I may judge him an extremely credible critic
of classical music or economic policy), for the reason I already
mentioned. These things are not irreversible; knowing someone
better can either reassure you or confirm the worst fears.

-----