Talk:Indophobia/Archive 1

message: I believe that it is reasonable to expect a citation for claims that Indophobia has increased in the United States, that many Bangladeshis consider India a regional bully or that India is turning its back on its creation, or that Hindus and Bangladeshis are being prosecuted (did you mean persecuted?) in Bangladesh and India respectively.
I also find it unlikely that there is no anti-Indian sentiment in Sri Lanka or Nepal, and I find the complete deletion of those sections rather odd.
I believe these are reasonable positions, and while one may disagree with my arguments, I don't think it is appropriate to call me a troll.71.174.94.146 (talk) 04:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See the Bangladesh section on Persecution of Hindus, as well as reports from Amnesty International on this topic. Plus, I doubt that there is any overt or systemic Indophobia in Sri Lanka, given that the LTTE depends on Indian Tamils for funding, and the Buddhist fanatics in the Sinhala Regime view India as "the holy land of Buddha" or whatever. Certainly, it is obvious that there is anti-Tamil racism and genocide from the Sinhala Buddhists, and likewise anti-Buddhist sentiments from the Sinhala Tamils, but none of them are germane to this article, and can be mentioned on Sri Lanka civil war articles. On an anecdotal note, most of the Sri lankans I have personally met are pro-India in some way or form, given that both the warring tribes down there are trying to suck up to Indians for support. 11:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please don't call me a troll. 

message: As explained  here the following was deleted in the article by  but no reason was put on the talkpage. Why was it deleted, and how could it be improved..
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indophobia&diff=157380525&oldid=156864610
Trautmann (1997) argues that British Indophobia was constructed by Evangelicalism and Utilitarianism and its chief architects were Charles Grant and James Mill.
Claims of Indophobic Bias in South Asian Studies have often been made. Such real or perceived bias can imply old-fashioned and prejudiced outsider interpretations of Eastern cultures and peoples:
*Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.Mill 1858
*One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
*Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.
He advocated the creation of a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect".Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:249, Minute on Indian education. This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people. 
His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism".Trautmann 1997:117
. American views of India, that have been quite negative, can be noted in the use of characterization like "Very Benighted Heathens", "the White Man's Burden" and the "Lesser Breed". http://www.jstor.org/view/00182745/ap020041/02a00040/6?
</small 
IMO, some of the deletions were unjustified. Librorum Prohibitorum (talk) 03:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions 

message: Going through this section, I have found the sources do not support the text. For example, this statement "The phobia that had grown from anti-Hinduism into Indophobia is also a part of ethnic Bengali Nationalism in the country[28], which continues to mark an average Bangladeshi’s perception of Indians" is incorrect. The source states that anti-Hindu attitudes grew into anti-Indian attitudes within a certain group that gained control over Bangladesh, not the country's initial secular leadership which was pro-India.
This is also misleading: "The term "Indophobia" is first applicable to denote these prejudices when they began to morph from traditional anti-Hinduism in the Muslim communities to political accusations against Bengali Hindus specifically pertaining to dual loyalty with India.[24][25] Such prejudices have been compared by many outside observers to the anti-Semitic propaganda of Nazi Germany.[26][27]." Only one source makes a reference to Bengali Hindus being treated like Jews in Nazi Germany, but states quite clearly that this situation occurred under Pakistani rule and Bengali Muslims also suffered persecution. It does not state that this was endemic to Bangladeshi nationalism or makes any reference to dual loyalty (since it refers to pre-independence).
This section is irrelevant: "Political disputes like the Farakka Barrage, Indo-Bangladesh enclaves and Indo-Bangladeshi barrier have created rift between the two." It is a complex territorial dispute, not "Indophobia".
"Persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh by the rising tide of militant Islamists and cross-border infiltration into India by illegal Bangladeshi immigrants has created likewise anti-Bangladeshi sentiment in India." This has nothing to do with "Indophobia" and should be deleted.
I am examining the other sources as well, so there may be more areas of the article to clean up and correct.--Conjoiner (talk) 18:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The point that the refs make is that the prejudices directed by Pakistanis against Bangladeshis were, in part, motivated by anti-Indian sentiment, even when they were directed against Bengali Muslims.See 1971 Bangladesh atrocities, particularly the statement "This widespread violence against Hindus was motivated by a policy to purge East Pakistan of what was seen as Hindu and Indian influences. The West Pakistani rulers identified the Bengali culture with Hindu and Indian culture, and thought that the eradication of Hindus would remove such influences from the majority Muslims in East Pakistan" . Perhaps it may be a good idea to put all this in a separate East Pakistan section instead of Bangladesh section. That would be ok. I agree with the rest of what you say, regarding the Farakka bridge etc. I was planning on removing that para anyway after protection expires. It is a Synthesis.Ghanadar galpa (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of creating an East Pakistan section, would it not make sense to put such text under the Pakistan section?--Conjoiner (talk) 18:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ok.Ghanadar galpa (talk) 18:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

text: How's this? By a Pakistani political analyst Khaled Ahmed in a Pakistani newspaper."We have another stereotype about the Hindus, which is remarkably similar (to antisemitism). Both Hindus and Jews were the underclass that plied commerce when being a warrior carried the badge of honour. Today both Jews and Hindus are on the rise. The warriors are down and out."Ghanadar galpa (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bangladesh 

message: questions for this ghanadar geezer: "Anti-Indian sentiments, coupled with anti-Hindu prejudices as well as prejudices directed at Indian Muslims have existed in Pakistan since it's formation. " 
Where is your source for this claim please answer becuase it just gos to show how indians can talk all the rubbish they want without sources.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.177.147 (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How's this? By a Pakistani political analyst Khaled Ahmed in a Pakistani newspaper."We have another stereotype about the Hindus, which is remarkably similar (to antisemitism). Both Hindus and Jews were the underclass that plied commerce when being a warrior carried the badge of honour. Today both Jews and Hindus are on the rise. The warriors are down and out."Ghanadar galpa (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghanadar 

message: dear hindu you still havent given me any sources you have just gloated about jews and hindus on the rise somehow.
p.s the underclass was created by these rising hindus your caste system poiosoned south asia now even hindus are disregarding there gita becuase if this underclass dalit hindu system.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.179.45 (talk) 10:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghanadar 

message: Perhaps it would be best to overcome ethnic and national grievances in order to write a balanced and well-written article. There has been no substantial addition to this article for some time. Perhaps it is best to review what is in the article line by line, pick out the most controversial sentences and discuss them sensibly. Attempting to play on other editors' perceived national sensitivities is unlikely to achieve anything. So, please, let us see the main points of contention and resolve them in a civilised debate.--Conjoiner (talk) 01:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving forward 

message: Commentators in Pakistan using the term "indophobia" to denote anti-Indian sentiment:
*Khaled Ahmed 
*Razi Azmi  Ghanadar galpa (talk) 00:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Commentators in Pakistan

message: The whole article is a hodge podge of different sources and ideas - e.g. Martial races theory, 1971 Bangladesh atrocities - which have been conflated with the term "Indophobia". This article does note that the term was coined by "American Indologist Thomas Trautmann to describe negative attitudes expressed by some British Indologists against Indian history, society, religions and culture", so really should only be a Wiktionary entry. It was just a term used in scholarly discourse, that can also apply to prejudice against people of the Indian subcontinent - that's about it. All of the stuff in this article belongs elsewhere - it is just a pov mêlée of sources.Pahari Sahib19:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Should be deleted