BJP’s Tarun Vijay stokes racism row: ‘We have south India... we live with black people’

[Mian]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...lack-people/story-rmaP8qguUK7zr1mWem2e4O.html

Former Rajya Sabha MP Tarun Vijay was invited by news channel Al Jazeera’s online show The Stream to discuss a string of recent attacks on African students in Greater Noida.

Former BJP parliamentarian Tarun Vijay waded into a racism row on Friday after a video of the politician making apparently racist remarks about “south Indians” went viral on social media.

Vijay was invited by news channel Al Jazeera’s online show The Stream to discuss a string of recent attacks on African students in Greater Noida. During his defence of India and its culture, the former Rajya Sabha MP made the controversial remark.

“If we were racist, why would we have all the entire south…Tamil, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra…why do we live with them? We have black people around us,” the politician was heard as saying in the video.

The comments come amid escalating tensions between a group of African nations – which have accused India of doing little to stop the assault – and the government that has called the accusation unfortunate.

Vijay took to Twitter to apologise for the remarks and said he meant to highlight India’s composite culture that worshipped the dark-skinned god, Krishna. “Feel bad ,really feel sorry, my apologies to those who feel i said different than what I meant.”

The row erupted last month after a group of Nigerian students were thrashed in Greater Noida by residents who were enraged after a local teenager’s death of a suspected drug overdose. The locals say the Africans supplied the drugs to the boy.

 

[czar]

Maybe what he meant was that " He have many dark skinned people in our country especially in South and inspite of that both dark and light skinned people get along well "

Instead of what media might project that

" South Indians are all dark people "

 

[CricketCartoons]

Don't know what is racist about it. Nothing derogatory unless people find it insulting to be called dark.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Don't know what is racist about it. Nothing derogatory unless people find it insulting to be called dark.

Exactly. But then he's apologised for it, so I can only assume he felt guilty of the charge of racism. Damned by his own tongue - what a nincompoop.

 

[troodon]

Fail!

Some South Indians are darker than Africans.

 

[Madplayer]

Exactly. But then he's apologised for it, so I can only assume he felt guilty of the charge of racism. Damned by his own tongue - what a nincompoop.

I dont know what you guys think but what he said didnt "sound" right to me. These words have to be avoided in our part of the world because discrimination based on who is fair and who is dark is a reality we cant run from. Even if his intentions werent bad, he would still be criticised due to what happens on ground.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I dont know what you guys think but what he said didnt "sound" right to me. These words have to be avoided in our part of the world because discrimination based on who is fair and who is dark is a reality we cant run from. Even if his intentions werent bad, he would still be criticised due to what happens on ground.

People should get out of the complex that dark is ugly and stop seeing it as as insult. The description of "Dark skinned 5 ft skinny" indians, used as an insult, is only an insult because Indians see it as a sign of inferiority.

Of course, that doesnt justify and give someone the right to be racist.

 

[Saeed]

I was distracted by Tarun's wig the whole time. Tarun is part of the problem, he refuses to accept racism exists in India and then he questions another Indian guy's nationality. If we watch the whole video he does sound racist.

 

[Zak_Fan]

Poorly handled by media. It should also be noticed that when interviewed in English, Indian politicians struggle to find words, and a lot of times, things don't come out the way they intended.

 

[JaDed]

Poorly handled by media. It should also be noticed that when interviewed in English, Indian politicians struggle to find words, and a lot of times, things don't come out the way they intended.

Then they should shut their mouths and say law will take its course,these ministers spend so much money on PR firms surely they can be groomed on how to speak to media absolute tools.

 

[JaDed]

BJP has made sure that it will never come to power in TN,Kerala.Luckily for them Congress doesn't matter anymore.

 

[srh]

Allah does not care whether you are dark-skinned or not. One of the very first muslims to go to heaven on judgement day is Hazrat Bilal (RAA) who was black. This BJP guy is racist and thats why he apologize.

 

[Zak_Fan]

Then they should shut their mouths and say law will take its course,these ministers spend so much money on PR firms surely they can be groomed on how to speak to media absolute tools.

True. What is also true is that media and people need to stop taking offense at anything. The only racist part about this story is people taking offense at being called dark.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

The BJP guy meant well but it all came out wrong.

As for dark.....its not about dark being inferior (in an objective way)...its about not referring to any community/people with that tag.

Tomorrow, someone will say calling someone as an

"Unemployed guy eating cheetos at the basement of his mom" is NOT an insult because its true and there is nothing to be ashamed of being unemployed, eating cheetos and living in your mom's basement..

It doesn't work that way.

Calling a community black/white/yellow IS racist.

Black/Yellow gets called out cos they are (as per society standards) considered to be relatively unattractive compared to white just like by society standards people will consider "unemployed guy" to be inferior to a successful dude.

Calling Kashmiris as very fair people is also racist but not taken so due to how the society perceives the world.

500 years down the line when white/black/yellow/brown coloured skin are not considered inferior or superior, we can assign the "racism"/"no racism" tag if someone refers to a section with some colour.

 

[Syed1]

There are two uncles from Chennai who work in my company and they both are fairer than an uncle from Delhi who also works here.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Calling a community black/white/yellow IS racist.

Stupid comment. LMAO

Racism is accompanied by prejudice. Big difference between racist and racial.

 

[troodon]

There are two uncles from Chennai who work in my company and they both are fairer than an uncle from Delhi who also works here.

Big misconception that all All South Indians are dark.

A lot of times, the skin tone depends on caste rather than the part of the country a person belongs to. Even with in a caste, it varies. I have seen Iyers and Iyengars from Tamilnadu who are pretty light skinned. There are also dark skinned ones among them.

North Indians assume that all South Indians are dark.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

There are two uncles from Chennai who work in my company and they both are fairer than an uncle from Delhi who also works here.

You will find many such instances.

Though in general, Southies are of a darker shade.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Big misconception that all All South Indians are dark.

A lot of times, the skin tone depends on caste rather than the part of the country a person belongs to. Even with in a caste, it varies. I have seen Iyers and Iyengars from Tamilnadu who are pretty light skinned. There are also dark skinned ones among them.

North Indians assume that all South Indians are dark.

Most of South Indians are dark, darker than average Indians. Yes, considering ALL to be dark is a misconception.

 

[SandyB]

Most of South Indians are dark, darker than average Indians. Yes, considering ALL to be dark is a misconception.

Care to elaborate where to find the Average Indian, dear sir ?

Big misconception that all All South Indians are dark.

A lot of times, the skin tone depends on caste rather than the part of the country a person belongs to. Even with in a caste, it varies. I have seen Iyers and Iyengars from Tamilnadu who are pretty light skinned. There are also dark skinned ones among them.

North Indians assume that all South Indians are dark.

This is what offends us . Its not about talking skin colour. "South indian people tend to be darker skinned " wouldve been a perfectly fine statement. No but the Northie guy has to say "those Black south Indians" and "us White ( read - Aryans)"..

Don't try to rationalise this as lost in translation, or poor English. I see this far too much, even among educated English speaking desis, to excuse this off as just poor english on part of the minister. !!

Ever been to the comment section of articles discussing South India ? Take the recent stray dog controversy in Kerala ("These keralaites have proved that not just their skin, but their hearts are black too!") , the TN - Karnataka water issue ("These dark people are so violent") , or South Indian movies heroes in general ("huh, Nivin Pauly/Surya , good looking .? Our guys look so much better ,read "whiter".. ).. . I can get you screenshots of many such comments ...

I'm not saying its all fine in the south . Our obsession with fairness is just as nauseating. See our movies or matrimony ads for gods sake.. !

But this whole issue stems from the misconception of the two wholly different races (Aryan Invasion theory) which has very little scientific basis. Also the sheer genetic mixing that has happened in Indian over 2 millenia, means that there is no "pure" race of any type here. But people keep clinging on to centuries old racial concepts ..

Well , I for one am pretty happy with this. BJP keeps digging its grave in the south deeper and deeper. First the renewed Hindi imposition and now this!. They keep pushing things and bring the twitchy southern neighbors more together.. !

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

In the whole North South tamasha, the main issue has been forgotten.

The fact that how racist we are to Africans.

Its not even up for debate.

But then a minister can't openly say it that "yes, we are horribly racist...what to do"

lol.

 

[Specialisttailender]

This is a stupid statement. No wonder people don't want to learn Hindi. Dark skinned people are considered less appealing not just in North India but also in South India.

 

[Specialisttailender]

In the whole North South tamasha, the main issue has been forgotten.

The fact that how racist we are to Africans.

Its not even up for debate.

But then a minister can't openly say it that "yes, we are horribly racist...what to do"

lol.

We are racist to Africans but then we complain how much Australians and foreigners look down upon us. The truth is Indians are looked down upon more than Black people in foreign countries. Black people bring the cool factors that we don't. We speak with a very unappealing accent, there is a stigma that our caste system is based on color hence people think we are racist, our men are considered to be creeps, awkward and nerds. What goes around comes around. Ever seen a cool indian hot shot that foreign girls drools over in Hollywood movies or TV shows? Nope, it never happens. You only see nerds, gas station owners and awkward creepy characters. That is the reflection of US view towards Indians.

 

[Saeed]

This is a stupid statement. No wonder people don't want to learn Hindi. Dark skinned people are considered less appealing not just in North India but also in South India.

Are South Indians treated differently by the so called Aryans in North?

 

[Specialisttailender]

Are South Indians treated differently by the so called Aryans in North?

Don't know, never been outside of South India of much. Only went to Delhi for Visa matters. I know they look down upon us in general, we do too but we look down upon Sardarjis, Rajasthanis, Africans and so on. No one is an Angel here.

 

[Specialisttailender]

Even South Indian movie makes dark skin people look like savages and inferior.

 

[PakLFC]

Political correctness going nuts! Calling them black is as racist as calling Afro-Caribbean people black. He probably did not realise that many Indian's consider "black" to be a racist term. Yes many Indian's are black or very dark skinned, so what? They are as human as anyone else.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Some South Indians are very dark, they are even darker than Africans, it is just skin colour, nothing wrong with what he said, unless he said black was ugly or disgusting then we have an issue..

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

South Indians are darker in general to other parts of India because they belong to a different race. There is nothing wrong in saying that out, however it's not true for everyone I see very light skinned Mallus and Tamils in Mumbai.

Even in the cricket team you see Balaji, Ashwin, Rahul to Laxman, Vijay even though from same region look different.

Even in PAK people from Baloch/ Lahore are more fairer to Karachi/ Sindh it's got more to do with geographical factors like closer to equator/ ocean.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

Some South Indians are very dark, they are even darker than Africans, it is just skin colour, nothing wrong with what he said, unless he said black was ugly or disgusting then we have an issue..

I saw in some other thread someone claim SL'ans and Mallus/ Tamils are of same race but an average Mallu is definitely light skinned to a Tamil/ SL'an, not sure what's the reason here!

 

[Romali_rotti]

I saw in some other thread someone claim SL'ans and Mallus/ Tamils are of same race but an average Mallu is definitely light skinned to a Tamil/ SL'an, not sure what's the reason here!

I have heard an old saying that long long time ago, ppl from the Tamil and Malayalee kingdoms went to settle in Sri Lanka and, the Singhalese raise evolved from the Malayalee ppl, they have similar eating habits, foods etc to us. I don't know if this is true.. However in general from my personal experience I have noted that Mallu's are lighter than Tamils and Singhalese ppl.

 

[Slog]

The MP has scored an own goal here

It's very evident that isn't lost in translation or his poor English. It's a simple racist remark.

There's a different between black and dark

 

[last_knight]

The BJP guy meant well but it all came out wrong.

As for dark.....its not about dark being inferior (in an objective way)...its about not referring to any community/people with that tag.

Tomorrow, someone will say calling someone as an

"Unemployed guy eating cheetos at the basement of his mom" is NOT an insult because its true and there is nothing to be ashamed of being unemployed, eating cheetos and living in your mom's basement..

It doesn't work that way.

Calling a community black/white/yellow IS racist.

Black/Yellow gets called out cos they are (as per society standards) considered to be relatively unattractive compared to white just like by society standards people will consider "unemployed guy" to be inferior to a successful dude.

Calling Kashmiris as very fair people is also racist but not taken so due to how the society perceives the world.

500 years down the line when white/black/yellow/brown coloured skin are not considered inferior or superior, we can assign the "racism"/"no racism" tag if someone refers to a section with some colour.

Racism is when we insult someone for the things one is born with. Physique, Complexion, City, Caste etc.

Unemployment is a humanly thing. Nothing wrong in criticising someone for unemployment. Parents always do this.

 

[SandyB]

South Indians are darker in general to other parts of India because they belong to a different race. There is nothing wrong in saying that out, however it's not true for everyone I see very light skinned Mallus and Tamils in Mumbai.

Even in the cricket team you see Balaji, Ashwin, Rahul to Laxman, Vijay even though from same region look different.

Even in PAK people from Baloch/ Lahore are more fairer to Karachi/ Sindh it's got more to do with geographical factors like closer to equator/ ocean.

There is no distinguishable "race" among Indians now . Migration of people from the North. west and South has happened far too long right from the Indus valley period. So all the Indians now have far too much mixed ethnicity , for the Aryan-Dravidan theory to hold any kind of weight !! Its not like Whites and African Americans in the states, who rarely mixed or intermarried well into the late 60's ..

I saw in some other thread someone claim SL'ans and Mallus/ Tamils are of same race but an average Mallu is definitely light skinned to a Tamil/ SL'an, not sure what's the reason here!

Mallus (Keralites) vary far too much in skin tone . There are quite a few reasons theorised :

1. Kerala is a highly forested, hilly land with lots of shade except near the coasts . Almost all the Human settlement areas in Kerala were at once dense forests. So it is believed that many Keralites would've lived for generations in the shadier regions, avoiding the same level of Sun tanning , that a person in Andhra or Tamil Nadu (with their vast open flat land spaces with little tree cover) would've faced.

2. The high level of ethnic mixing with Arabs and Europeans in Kerala's history, which I've elaborated before. The Arabs who came here intermarried among locals. Also the Syrian Christians and Jews who landed here around AD 100 -AD 200 , either for Trade or to avoid religious persecution ,where thriving communities. These communities went to great lengths to ensure that they married among their own family groups, and avoided marrying locals. So they preserved their distinctively Arab (read fairness) features for a long time, unlike the local Muslims. This model fell apart towards the late 19th or 20th centuries, and they started marrying other Christians , still you would find a large proportion of very fair Keralites come from the "Syrian Christian" communities here. Compared to that TN, Karnataka and Andhra (except Hyderabad region), had mostly conservative Hindu population until the late 19th century ..

3. The Brahmins ( fair as usual) of Kerala (called Namboothiris) were very less in population, and suffered from lack of enough women. So inspite of the extreme untouchability practised by them , they were allowed to break the untouchability law under special circumstances ie, sleep with lower caste women (both vaishyas and sudras) of their choosing. So the untouchability law would be temporarily suspened for the lower caste woman till the next day morning, till the Brahmin woke up out of bed(LOL). Soon after she could not touch the Brahmin (which incurred heavy punishment) nor claim any kind of alimony / rights /support for the kid that may be born out of the consummation. ! The husbands of said woman were expected to give up their bedroom and stand guard to the home till the Brahmin was finished with his thing..
So this too helped in the resulting children having fairer complexion , but none of the previlages of a Brahmin offspring !

Combine all these factors , over a period of 1500 years, resulted in Kerala people having far more diverse range of ethnic features and skin tone compared to SL or TN, even though they are almost similar in ethnicity ..

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Racism is when we insult someone for the things one is born with. Physique, Complexion, City, Caste etc.

Unemployment is a humanly thing. Nothing wrong in criticising someone for unemployment. Parents always do this.

I expected one such response atleast. Haha.

Of course, you are right but I am not comparing those 2 directly. I am talking about what is considered insult with respect to how its viewed in society.

Forget unemployment. Calling a guy with monkeyish face as monkey is a huge insult.

Calling a black person black is not an insult per se (depends on situation).

But calling a community (filled with people of various complexions) as black kind of is.

When you add the fact that when taking about an existing issue (racism against Africans), calling a community black (even if its not meant as an insult) is anything but ok.

 

[Specialisttailender]

I have heard an old saying that long long time ago, ppl from the Tamil and Malayalee kingdoms went to settle in Sri Lanka and, the Singhalese raise evolved from the Malayalee ppl, they have similar eating habits, foods etc to us. I don't know if this is true.. However in general from my personal experience I have noted that Mallu's are lighter than Tamils and Singhalese ppl.

The Singhalese evolved from Bengal, local tribes and even little bit of Kannada influence is also there. Tamils have always lived there, the history of Tamils in Sri lanka is longer than the existence of Malayalam. The closest pathway from India to Sri Lanka is only about 18 KM from Indian and you can travel in boats easily. Sri Lanka wasn't always locked by waters, how do you think elephants and other animals got to the island ? Malayalam and Sri Lankan cuisine are similar especially like Idiyappam and Pittu for example. Idyappam and Pittu existed in and even the originated from Tamil Nadu. My great aunt made Idiyappam and Pittu and our origin is located right in central of Tamil Nadu, it is one of the oldest city in Tamil Nadu it is just our cuisine have died over the years. There was very little influence from invaders in Sri Lanka so the Tamil traditional, language and culture is a bit more archaic with touch of European influence. You can still find rural villages in Tamil Nadu where people still consume Idiyappam and Pittu it is just rare. I live in Canada and there are little over 200,000 Sri Lankan Tamilians and ratio of dark skin to light skin is same as i would see back in Madurai.

 

[czar]

The Singhalese evolved from Bengal, local tribes and even little bit of Kannada influence is also there. Tamils have always lived there, the history of Tamils in Sri lanka is longer than the existence of Malayalam. The closest pathway from India to Sri Lanka is only about 18 KM from Indian and you can travel in boats easily. Sri Lanka wasn't always locked by waters, how do you think elephants and other animals got to the island ? Malayalam and Sri Lankan cuisine are similar especially like Idiyappam and Pittu for example. Idyappam and Pittu existed in and even the originated from Tamil Nadu. My great aunt made Idiyappam and Pittu and our origin is located right in central of Tamil Nadu, it is one of the oldest city in Tamil Nadu it is just our cuisine have died over the years. There was very little influence from invaders in Sri Lanka so the Tamil traditional, language and culture is a bit more archaic with touch of European influence. You can still find rural villages in Tamil Nadu where people still consume Idiyappam and Pittu it is just rare. I live in Canada and there are little over 200,000 Sri Lankan Tamilians and ratio of dark skin to light skin is same as i would see back in Madurai.

I think Sinhalese are just the same people as Tamils in SL...... I don't think it's fair to separate them as descendents of Buddhist preachers from Orissa, Bengal etc.

Same set of people who formed their own language and follow Buddhism over a period of time .

Sinhalese are nothing else but indigenous Tamils of Sri Lanka who became influenced by Theravada Buddhism and thus formed their own language over a period of time hence the distinct identity. Most of the times, one cannot even identify between a Sinhalese and a Tamil.

I find it funny how both Tamils and Sinhalese claim to be original indigenous inhabitants of Sri Lanka while classifying other as migrants who moved much later.

 

[SandyB]

The Singhalese evolved from Bengal, local tribes and even little bit of Kannada influence is also there. Tamils have always lived there, the history of Tamils in Sri lanka is longer than the existence of Malayalam. The closest pathway from India to Sri Lanka is only about 18 KM from Indian and you can travel in boats easily. Sri Lanka wasn't always locked by waters, how do you think elephants and other animals got to the island ? Malayalam and Sri Lankan cuisine are similar especially like Idiyappam and Pittu for example. Idyappam and Pittu existed in and even the originated from Tamil Nadu. My great aunt made Idiyappam and Pittu and our origin is located right in central of Tamil Nadu, it is one of the oldest city in Tamil Nadu it is just our cuisine have died over the years. There was very little influence from invaders in Sri Lanka so the Tamil traditional, language and culture is a bit more archaic with touch of European influence. You can still find rural villages in Tamil Nadu where people still consume Idiyappam and Pittu it is just rare. I live in Canada and there are little over 200,000 Sri Lankan Tamilians and ratio of dark skin to light skin is same as i would see back in Madurai.

The Chera, Chola or Pandya empires were forerunners of present day Tamil and Malayalam cultures. They were tamil speaking kingdoms for sure, but that Tamil culture and language is as much a predecessor to present day Malayalam as it is to Present day Tamil.

So generalising everything as "Originated in Tamil Nadu" is too much of an appropriation. According to most historical accounts both Appam and Puttu have been referenced in the ancient accounts and literature as originating in Tamilakam aka Ancient Tamil Country which comprises present day Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Pondicherry ,Lakshadweep and the Canara(Mangalore) part of Karnataka. Appam is believed to have originated in the Southern Tip first. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appam

Check out this link for more info on the dishes .. http://www.peppertrail.com/inner.php?menu_id=22&sm1_id=120&index_id=3

 

[KingKhanWC]

The MP is devoid of intellect. Racism is more than one's skin colour which he doesn't understand.

 

[Specialisttailender]

I think Sinhalese are just the same people as Tamils in SL...... I don't think it's fair to separate them as descendents of Buddhist preachers from Orissa, Bengal etc.

Same set of people who formed their own language and follow Buddhism over a period of time .

Sinhalese are nothing else but indigenous Tamils of Sri Lanka who became influenced by Theravada Buddhism and thus formed their own language over a period of time hence the distinct identity. Most of the times, one cannot even identify between a Sinhalese and a Tamil.

I find it funny how both Tamils and Sinhalese claim to be original indigenous inhabitants of Sri Lanka while classifying other as migrants who moved much later.

Do you know what you are saying or are you assuming ?