What does the BDS movement reveal about Muslim-majority countries?

As I am not one of those Muslims who dream of becoming western establishments’ lapdogs, I don’t see it as a manifestation of anti-Semitism. And yes, I am also one of those people who don’t see anti-Zionism as inherently anti-Semitic. It is not whether you hate Israel or not, it is about why you hate Israel.

Of course, it is not to say the boycott movement is problem-free

I am from Indonesia. Even though it is a growing economy, we are still dependent on foreign corporations and it becomes more obvious when the movement started heating up.

Indonesia has definitely lots of foreign products; Wall’s ice cream, Dove and Sunsilk are among the examples. But, I am surprised there are also Indonesian products which are already acquired by foreign companies (Bango sweet soy sauce and Buavita fruit drinks are now owned by Unilever) and products which I mistakenly thought as Indonesian (I didn’t know Blueband margarine was Dutch and I didn’t realise Royco’s graphic design was the exact same as Knorr’s).

I don’t know about the rest of the Muslim world. But, I do know coke, western restaurant chains and luxury western car brands are also popular elsewhere.

As I am not one of those “might is right” weirdos, I don’t see the global dominance of pro-Israel western establishments as a proof of Israel’s moral rightness.

But, it is a sombre reminder of how Muslim-majority countries have some major weaknesses (you know, apart from the elephant in the room that is Islamic extremism): we are not as economically competitive as the west and we don’t take pride in consuming local products.

Unfortunately, I don’t have the solutions.

I don’t know how to make my fellow countrymen take more pride in local products. I don’t know how to make my country more economically competitive.

I certainly don’t how to be economically competitive and environmentally, culturally and socially sustainable* at the same time. Heck, I am not even sure they can go hand in hand.

Okay, I am overthinking it.

My point is the boycott movement should be a wake-up call for all of us.

If we want to be free from other countries’ control, we have to be economically independent** as well. No matter how collectively idealistic we are, no matter how hard it is to buy our minds and hearts, our economic independence means we still give profits to foreign entities, constantly fattening the wallets of pro-Israel western establishments.

.

.

*The more industrial an economy is, the more it emits C02 and consumes natural resources (even though it is not to say poorer countries are green). When I say social and cultural sustainability, I am referring to equality and commercialisation, respectively; is it possible for a highly-developed economy to maintain relatively low income inequality and commodification of cultures?

**When I say economically independent, I am not talking about banning imports and implementing restrictive protectionism. I am talking how our local products are so high quality, affordable and prestigious, we choose to consume them even when foreign options are readily available.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Minding our own businesses and the hypocrisy of zionists

Pro-Palestine people are often criticised for spending too much time minding other countries while ignoring problems within their own turfs. Unfortunately, there is truth in the criticism.

Yes, some of us – especially my fellow Muslims – are like that. We care too much about issues happening in faraway lands involving people we have never met while ignoring issues in our own homelands. It is also hypocritical how many Muslims love condemning Israel while staying silent about atrocities committed by fellow believers.

But, at the same time, the criticism can also be dishonest.

When expressed by people who are apathetic about international issues, I am fine with it. But, when expressed by non-Israeli zionists, it is just laughably hypocritical.

It doesn’t matter if you see Israel – a place you didn’t grow up in – as an extension of your home country, it is still a foreign country! Yes, your talk about supporting Israel shows you are guilty of the same thing you criticise pro-Palestine people for!

To make it more laughably hypocritical, you have spent many years “playing warriors” about problems happening overseas. You were the ones who advocated the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, at the expense of destabilising the already-unstable region even further. You couldn’t care less about helping the ordinary citizens, you only care about the delusion of playing heroes.

To make it even more laughably hypocritical, you get extremely defensive every time foreigners – especially non-western ones – dare to point out your countries’ weaknesses. Instead of correcting the inaccuracies or adding some nuances, you – without any sense of self-awareness – tell them to mind their own countries’ businesses.

Your fellow zionists may fawn over your so-called “definitive rebuttal” against pro-Palestine sentiment. But, everyone else can see through it.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

The most bizarre arguments I have ever encountered

Throughout the years in my blogposts, I have written about the people I have argued with, ranting about their narrow-mindedness, poor moral integrity and their lack of brain usage.

Sometimes, I don’t talk about specific individuals, more about groups of them. When I do talk about specific individuals, their worldview and behaviours aren’t uniquely theirs; I have encountered others just like them.

But, in this case, I am a bit overwhelmed.

Online, more than once, I have criticised westerners’ ideas of diversity and multiculturalism. While I do acknowledge pogroms are non-existent in the modern-day west, I despise the wide-held belief that diversity and multiculturalism only exist there; I also criticise some westerners’ try-hard attempts to be multicultural, which end up as tokenism rather than genuine acceptance.

I also assert that many Indonesians have strong experiences with interethnic and interreligious relations… while admitting the latter is more flawed than the former and our race relations still have lots to desire.

And the reactions are predictable.

Conceited westerners get too defensive, accusing me of demonising the entire west and whitewashing my own country’s image. Every time I talk about genuinely good things about Indonesia, self-hating Indonesians start making weird criticisms about their homeland: they accuse Indonesia of being “guilty” of certain things… while also fawning other countries which are also “guilty” of those same things.

In this particular case, this person is one of those self-hating Indonesians; they rebuke me by asserting Indonesia’s proneness to sectarian violence. I cannot deny it because it is unfortunately true.

But, I also state that acceptance in the west is also far from perfect and the COVID pandemic proves it; in some countries, there was an increase in hate crimes against people of Chinese descent… or anyone perceived as such.

This person says that’s BS. Not only the increase was exaggerated (as if a threefold increase was nothing), they also said determining how bad sectarianism should not be based on how fearful the minorities are, but based on how many tourists and investors still flocking into the area.

Then, it went downhill even further.

I live in Batam and when I said it is very diverse, they said its diversity was due to its location in Java, which this person insinuatingly considers to be the country’s only diverse place.

Wrong! Not only Batam is not located in or near Java, it is an island city which is a part of an archipelago located east of Sumatra, South of Singapore and Malaysia.

They also said the people of the city of Banjarmasin were being intentionally provocative… simply for using words differently, as if this person’s dialect is the objectively correct one.

And I still haven’t talked about the weirdest part.

They also believe Indonesia is not multicultural because it suffers from Malaysisation AKA domination of Malay culture. Their evidence? Our national language – Indonesian – is one of the standardised registers of Malay language.

I told them our national language is Malay-derived because, prior the Europeans’ arrival, Malay had already been used as a lingua franca in the region for centuries.

This person said it wasn’t a good enough because the language was used only among traders. When I asked which language they think deserve to be the national one, they gave me two: Javanese and Sundanese. Why? Simply because ethnic Javanese and Sundanese are the biggest and second biggest ethnic groups.

While they are indeed the biggest, there is a problem with that: their languages were never used as lingua francas.

They were never used as mediums of interethnic and intercultural communications. They don’t have experiences catering to other cultures. While old Javanese was used outside Java, it was mostly used as a literary language of the educated elite. Because the ethnic Javanese form around forty percent of the country’s total population, declaring their language as the national would culturally suffocate the other ethnic groups.

Malay? While it is based on the native language of one ethnic group, it has been used interethnically and interculturally for centuries; it has many years of experiences catering to different cultures.

In fact, there are at least twenty Malay-based creoles found all over the region, including the eastern part of Indonesia. Malay also has some influences in even more faraway places; Sri Lanka has an endangered Malay creole language, there is a practically extinct language in western Australia called Broome Pearling Lugger Pidgin which uses significant amount of Malay words and, prior the Spanish colonisation, Malay was the lingua franca of the Philippines.

The standardised register is different from the one used in Singapore – where Malay is mostly used by ethnic Malays – and in Malay-majority Malaysia and Brunei.

Indonesian has some loanwords from the regional Indonesian languages and, from all of them, Javanese is the biggest contributor.

Unlike the ones in the other aforementioned countries, which still retain their melodious sounds, the standard phonology in Indonesia is very flat and clipped; even though it does sound lifeless and bland, it is a type of accent which anyone can easily acquire. It is also normal to hear public figures – including our current president who is an ethnic Javanese – speaking Indonesian with noticeable regional accents.

Not to mention the most widely-used informal register of Indonesian is a creole natively spoken by ethnic Betawis, adopted by non-Betawi Jakartans and any Indonesians who heavily consume the national pop culture. Different regions also have their own informal registers of Indonesian, which are basically Indonesian infused with words from the local languages.

Basically, our standard Malay has mutated so much, it no longer becomes a “purely Malay” tongue.

I have a controversial take: if I have to choose between Dutch and Javanese, I would rather choose the former as our national language.

Yes, it is the colonial tongue. But, because of its entirely foreign origin, it doesn’t take side with any of our indigenous ethnic groups. In the context of Indonesian unity, it can be neutral.

And let me reveal this person’s most outrageous claim: Indonesia suffers from Malayisation. It is outrageous because, even if our standard Malay is still a “purely Malay” tongue, it is still the only Malay thing about our national identity.

None of our patriotic songs have Malay-influenced melodies and arrangements; they tend to sound like marches more than anything. Every time the country is represented in overseas performance arts events, Javanese and Balinese music and dance are prevalently represented, Malay ones barely exist.

After I said Malayisation exist where ethnic Malays congregate, that person accused me of flip-flopping and being inconsistent. I wasn’t. Malayisation existing in some regions is not the same as it existing on the national level.

But, do you what exists on the national level? Javanisation.

While the Indonesian establishment is very multiethnic, there is no doubt it is dominated by ethnic Javanese. Literally all of our presidents are of Javanese descent (even though, admittedly, Habibie didn’t grow up surrounded by Javanese culture).

Soeharto also implemented a policy of transmigration, in which he sent ethnic Javanese citizens to settle in less crowded places outside their homeland. Whether he intentionally used the policy to Javanise the country or not, it doesn’t matter. It still helped Javanising the country even further.

I have talked a lot about how our national symbols are of Hindu and Buddhist origins. But, recently, I just found out they might be the legacy of Majapahit, an ancient kingdom centered in Java which conquered a huge chunk of modern-day Indonesia, including a small chunk of western New Guinea. The Javanisation started long before the country existed.

When I pointed those facts out to the person (minus the Majapahit one), they said Javanisation is a good thing. Good because it supposedly prevents the spread of Islamic extremism.

Which is, again, more BS!

If that is the case, then why does the country still end up having cases of it? Why aren’t the people raised in Java immune to it? Why does this long-Javanised region fail to prevent its rise? I don’t know if the person answered the question or not, as I got too exhausted to revisit the thread.

Whatever the causes of extremism are, if you pay attention to the world, no backgrounds can make you immune to it, not even the so-called superior Javanese culture.

Now, to sum things up:

I am overwhelmed for various reasons.

That person lost their credibility almost immediately. Batam is not just a village in the middle of nowhere, it is a city of over a million residents, a job opportunities destination for many Indonesians and, due to its proximity to Singapore and Malaysia, one of Indonesia’s gateways to the world.

If you don’t know the location one of Indonesia’s major cities, it is clear you lack even the most basic knowledge about this country. You shouldn’t be that confident when talking about the country.

This person also claims to care about multiculturalism. But, their words clearly indicates otherwise.

In the western context, this person thinks sectarian violence is bad NOT because it makes minorities feel unsafe and unwelcome in their own countries, but because it drives tourists and investors away. Basically, this person believes multiculturalism – in the west, at least – should be about the money, not the minorities’ well-being.

I have encountered people who love exaggerating western countries’ diversity and multiculturalism, while also downplaying and even denigrating the non-western ones’. But, this is the first time I encountered someone who sees multiculturalism solely through the profitability lens.

In the Indonesian context, this person has contradictory views. They believe adopting a national language based on Malay is a symptom of Malay cultural imperialism, even though it is the only Malay thing about our national identity. Yet, at the same time, not only they tolerate Javanese cultural imperialism, they wish it happens more thoroughly.

Combine that with their unreasonable hatred of Banjarmasin dialect, it is obvious their “concern” for multiculturalism is just a mask, a mask to conceal their prejudice against anything non-Javanese, to conceal their sense of Javanese supremacy.

I am not surprised by the existence of such views; everyone here knows Javanisation and Javanese supremacism exist. I am just taken aback someone finally says the quiet part out loud.

.

.

*My usage of the word “Javanese” can be interpreted loosely.

Foreigners who know nothing about Indonesia may assume Javanese refers to all people and things from Java. That’s incorrect.

In Indonesia, the word Javanese refers to the ethnic Javanese – who are indigenous to Java – and anything associated with them. If you are referring to someone or something in Java and they are not “Javanese”, you say “of Java” and “from Java” instead.

To make it more confusing, the Javanese are not the only ethnic groups indigenous to the Island – there are also the Sundanese, Cirebonese, Madurese, Betawis, Osings, Tenggerese, Banyumasans – and yet, they have the island’s namesake. For the longest time, I didn’t know why that was the case.

Then, one day, I found a book called A New Spirit (Indonesian: Semangat Baru) by Mikihiro Moriyama, a Japanese scholar specialising in the Sundanese language. He asserted that centuries ago (don’t remember exactly when, probably before the 14th or 15th) Sundanese people were once considered a sub-group of the Javanese. Nowadays, no one consider the two as the same; even their languages are mutually unintelligible with each other.

According Wikipedia (yes, I know), people who identify as Betawis didn’t exist prior the 1800s and, even though Cirebonese identity has existed for centuries, its existence was first acknowledged by the census in 2010. The Madurese are from Madura, which isn’t technically in Java; it is an island located very close to Java.

The Banyumasans, Osings and Tenggerese are considered subgroups of Javanese. I know many Banyumasans see themselves as Javanese. I am not sure about the other two.

For the most part, if you have basic knowledge about the country, what constitutes as “Javanese” should be clear-cut to you. So, what do I mean by the word being interpreted loosely?

The problem is not simply Javanese people dominating the establishment, it is also about how island itself exerts too much power.

Jakarta – the country’s capital, economic centre and media centre – is located in Java. If a national company is not headquartered in Jakarta, it is very likely headquartered in other cities in Java. Most of the top universities are in Java. When a development happens, it starts in Java and other islands may or may not be given the opportunity to follow suit.

Indonesia is not simply Javanised, it is also very Java-centric. Two different, but equally problematic things.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Stop pretending that looting preserves cultures

The European colonisers looted them not because they cared about preserving the local heritages, but because they wanted to impose hard power.

If that wasnā€™t the case, not only they would try their best to not damage the artefacts, they also wouldnā€™t massacre the humans who created the heritage and imposed western cultures upon the survivors. We know damn well it was the exact opposites.

And yes, even the contemporary westerners who oppose repatriation also don’t care about cultures.

Even without those vultures of private collectors, the artefacts still end up in museums in faraway lands, trapped behind glass panels. Yes, the visitors are able to admire the unique aesthetics and read the descriptions on the plaques. But, they only perceive them as mere foreign and exotic items and will always do. They won’t understand how culturally significant the artefacts are.

If they are in their “natural habitats” (they are often small bits of a huge archeological site), we can see how they make important parts of entire cultures. In fact, we may witness them being used in the rituals.

Never mind the immersion. How can the artefacts help us witnessing the still-living cultures in action if we don’t see them being “utilised” as originally intended?

No, the “they-don’t-care-about-their-own-cultures” argument is invalid. If you even bother trying, you can find those who still cling onto their heritage. The ones who don’t care are the westernised big city dwellers and government officials and, believe it or not, they don’t represent their entire countries.

Now, what if the cultures represented by the artefacts are already extinct? Surely, it doesn’t matter where they are kept. Well, it still does.

Just take a look at those dinosaurs. They went extinct sixty five million years ago and yet, we still see their descendants not only as modern day reptiles, but also as birds.

Extinct cultures also have left legacies.

Egypt has been an Arabised and Muslim-majority territory for a long time and yet, its Coptic Christian citizens still use Coptic – a Greek-influenced, modern descendent of Ancient Egyptian – as their liturgical language.

Indonesia, my home country, is a Muslim-majority country with Christianity as the biggest minority religion. But, you still can see hints of our Buddhist and Hindu pasts.

Not only we have Sanskrit loanwords in some of our languages (including the national one) and we occasionally use the sembah gesture (which is based on AƱjali Mudrā), our official national symbols are derived from Hindu and Buddhist mythologies and most government institutions use Sanskrit mottos.

I don’t have to use non-western countries as examples. The entire western civilisation has its roots in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, two long-extinct civilisations. Latin and Greek are still studied as the classical languages.

If you take a look at western individual countries, you can see some uniqueness as well.

In the United States, one can sees Native American and West African influences through its many different music genres and some of its regional cuisines, even though Native Americans are now an unbelievably tiny minority due to genocides and most black Americans are descendants of slaves who were forcibly uprooted from their homelands.

Even though Al-Andalus has ceased to exist for half a millennium, you still can see the Middle Eastern influences in the Iberian peninsula: from the abundance of Arabic loanwords in Spanish and Portuguese to the abundance of Moorish architecture in, unsurprisingly, modern-day Andalusia.

Nothing lives in a vacuum. Just because something happened a long time ago, that does not mean it won’t leave its marks. The immersion may be weak. But, it still there.

I am also certain learning languages and cuisines is a more effective cultural immersion method than simply staring at goddamn objects.

Obviously, the arguments I stated above are not entirely mine; I either paraphrased them or added my own personal thoughts to them. But, there is one argument which also isn’t mine…. and it is an argument so obvious, I hate myself for not thinking about it earlier: political stability.

Some argue the artefacts should stay in the west because it is the only place free from any political instabilities. But, Youtuber Andrew Rakich – better known as Atun-Shei films – reminds us to expect the unexpected.

In a video which title I forget, he asserts that just because places like London are stable, that does not mean they will always; we cannot certainly predict the future… because we humans are so goddamn unpredictable.

That statement reminds me of what I have learned about history.

Places like Syria, Afghanistan Somalia and Iraq were peaceful (at least, on a surface level as I am deriving this info from photos and videos). Now, they are synonymous with wars, wars and wars.

Less than a century ago, Europe was involved in two world wars; the second started just twenty one years after the first one ended. Now, it is often one of the main destinations for war refugees.

Basically, unless you are into historical denialism and see humans as nothing but predictable androids, the political stability argument does not hold water.

Just like the British Museum’s roof.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

ā€œThere is no bigotry here!ā€œ

Some nationalistically zealous westerners I have encountered love to claim that their countries are bigotry-free.

Their evidences? People of religious and racial minority backgrounds not being hunted down like animals, having high-ranking jobs both in public and private sectors and even becoming celebrities. How can there be bigotry when minorities can achieve high status in their own countries?

I notice that those people often harbour anti-Muslim sentiment as well. With that in mind, I want to do the same thing with my country.

I declare that Indonesia, world’s biggest Muslim-majority country, is free from any bigotry, both religious and racial!

Indonesians Christian thrive in every field imaginable; from national government to corporate business, they can ace everything! There are also Hindus thriving in national governmental institutions; some have also become high-ranking government officials!

Our state broadcaster broadcast not just Islamic sermons, but also Protestant, Catholic, Buddhist, Hindu and, recently, Confucian ones. From all of those religions, only Confucianism does not have dedicated state-funded universities.

In the 50’s, while western Protestants and Catholics were too busy hating each other, Indonesia already had non-Muslims working as high-ranking government officials. Not to mention that from all historical figures who are appointed as national heroes, at least forty of them are non-Muslims.

Chinese-Indonesians are among the most well-off and educated demographics in the country. They also thrive in almost every field imaginable. In fact, one of the most beloved politicians in the country is of Chinese descent… and also a Christian.

Apart from paragraph four, those are indeed facts. I have used them to rebuke foreigners who think Indonesia is the same as Saudi Arabia and ISIS territory. But, I will never use them to sweep the dark side under the rug.

Indonesia only officially recognises those six aforementioned religions, none are indigenous. Those who identify with none of them have to choose one in official documents. Students cannot opt out of religious classes at schools, including the public ones. While there are non-Muslim high-ranking government officials, Indonesian presidents have always been Muslims.

It is also much easier for non-Muslims to be charged with blasphemy than Muslims are; that Christian Chinese-Indonesian politician was convicted while his detractors – many of whom are Muslim extremists – have yet to be. While rare, violent religious clashes have definitely occurred. Not to mention Islamic extremism is getting more and more common and the government barely do anything about it.

And race relations are even worse.

For more than thirty years, Chinese-Indonesians were banned from publicly expressing their ancestral heritage and running for office. They were disproportionately blamed for supporting communism, even though non-Chinese-Indonesians were just as active as communists. In the late 90’s riots, they were brutalised, raped and had their houses and livelihoods burned down; they have yet to get justice. While the far richer ones were safe, their socioeconomic status made them an even bigger scapegoat.

Don’t forget the Indonesian Papuans. While they don’t suffer from pogroms (that I know of), they are certainly among the most neglected demographics. The national government started building highways in the region only a few years ago. The poorest and second poorest provinces in the country are the Papuan ones and, at the same time, one of the most expensive cities in the country is also Papuan; I doubt the government can afford to pay the subsidies forever.

I should also mention Western New Guinea – now called Indonesian Papua – was annexed from the Dutch. While there were Papuan individuals involved, there are no evidences that the annexation had widespread support among the Papuans.

Their homeland was annexed, they have been neglected from the very beginning, they get called monkeys… and the flag-wavers have the gall to accuse them of acting like thin-skinned and ungrateful brats.

I believe that even if Chinese-Indonesians and Papuan-Indonesians are predominantly-Muslim, they would still get severely discriminated against. Their races and/or non-Austronesian lineage make them easy targets.

Oh and that beloved Christian Chinese-Indonesian politician? He is also one of the most hated public figures.

Now, what’s the point of my rambling?

If an Indonesian of minority backgrounds has criticisms about Indonesia, especially ones based on their personal experiences, and I respond by spewing paragraphs four to seven, you would be justifiably angry at me.

Instead of acknowledging the reality, I choose to whitewash it by claiming the good side is the only existing side. Not only I choose to be intellectually dishonest, I also give my fellow human beings the finger by dismissing their grievances. My mind fails to realise that one can praise and condemn a country at the same time.

Now, what if I am not an Indonesian Muslim of Austronesian descent? What if I am a Christian westerner of white European descent….

… And I screech about how my western homeland is the epitome of multiculturalism because non-whites and non-Christians can achieve high statuses and be free from lynching, even though stereotypes, hate speech, discriminations and history denialism are rampant?

Some of you would still be angry at me. Some.

The rest of you would actually agree with me. You see the west as literally the only beacon of civility and morality in existence, where literally every good thing in life comes from. You cannot comprehend the world outside the west has anything good to offer without western influences.

No, don’t deny it. You know damn well those people exist. In fact, you may be one of them.

If you perceive any criticisms of your beloved western homeland as slanderous and bigoted, you are one of those people.

If you perceive any acknowledgement of the positive aspects of the Muslim and/or non-western world as whitewashing, you are one of those people.

If you condemn the Muslim and/or non-western world for doing something and yet praising the west doing the exact same thing, you are one of those people.

If you believe Muslims and/or non-westerners are obligated to be grateful of westerners for every good thing in life, you are one of those people.

if you have believe minorities not getting mass murdered is enough to make the west the bastion of multiculturalism, you are one of those people.

If you feel personally attacked by this blogpost, you are definitely one of those people.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Your unique country isn’t

For non-Americans, it can be a bit weird how Americans identify themselves with their home states when introducing themselves. It does not matter if they interact with foreigners, who may not have heard of the more ‘obscure’ states.

In a Youtube comment section (forget which one), a commenter pointed out that weirdness. Then, among the repliers, there had to be that one annoying person.

He/she could have said this was just an American quirk or had something to do with strong sense of regionalism.

Nope. For him/her, it proves America is literally the only diverse country on earth.

Others, me included, were quick to point out the US of fucking A is NOT the only one. There are countries like Canada, Australia and Brazil where the indigenous populations are brutally sidelined by Europeans of various nationalities and also ones like China, South Africa, Malaysia, India, China and Indonesia. Yet, when introducing themselves to foreigners, people of those countries always refer to their countries instead of their home provinces, states or what have you.

After me and others kept pestering him/her, she/he relented. But then, she/he proceeded to claim that the cultural differences are more pronounced in the US than they are in other countries.

Again, not true. In Indonesia alone, you can easily see how different the ethnic groups are just by looking at their traditional attires or by eating their dishes; I don’t remember what other commenters said about this. He/she did relent for the second time.

But then, she/he claimed that unlike the other countries, USA consists of people who don’t share the same roots.

He/she was right to say the people in those countries share the same roots. The majority of Chinese mainlanders are Hans, most languages in India are either Indo-Aryan or Dravidian, the majority of people in South Africa are of Bantu roots and most Indonesians are of Austronesian roots.

But then, the majority of Americans are descended of Europeans who mostly spoke Indo-European languages. Besides, nowadays, most of them are monolingual Anglophones; their surnames are the only remnants of their non-Anglo heritage, assuming they haven’t been Anglicised.

To make this more frustrating, that person was not the first person I encountered who exaggerated America’s uniqueness, particularly regarding diversity. It shows how ignorance about the world can mislead us into embracing exceptionalism.

I have also encountered people who make this argument about the west as a whole. They use this argument not because they believe in exceptionalism, but because they hate how the west is the only place where multiculturalism is supposedly ‘enforced’…

… Which is, of course, bullshit. Not only diversity exists elsewhere, there are African and Asian countries significantly more diverse than the European ones.

According to Alesina et al and Fearon’s ethnic and cultural diversity indexes, African, Asian and Latin American countries -especially the African ones- easily outrank the west. In fact, the indigenous populations of many non-western countries are already diverse without immigrants.

Iran’s biggest ethnic group forms 50-60% of the population. Afghanistan’s two biggest ethnic ones comprise 40-50% and 25% of the population. Indonesia’s? 40% and 18%. Kenya’s biggest is 17%. Papua New Guinea’s population is almost nine million and it has over eight hundred indigenous languages. Vanuatu? Three hundred thousand people, over a hundred and ten languages.

And we haven’t talked about religions, yet… which in this case, I have to refer to Singapore: biggest religion 33%, second biggest 18%. Unusual, even for many diverse countries.

Those countries are effortlessly multicultural without boasting how multicultural they are. Heck, some even never utter the word.

My point is multiculturalism is not an exclusively western thing. The more you know about the world, the more stupid it is to believe otherwise.

Oh, and if you want to insist on your country’s uniqueness and/or victim status, make sure to mention things that do not happen fucking elsewhere!

.

.

Forgot to mention this: diversity also applies to non-white indigenous people of western countries.

In the US, there are five hundred and seventy four federally recognised tribes. In Australia, four hundred. In Brazil, at least two thousand, not accounting undiscovered ones. Mind you, those are the numbers AFTER they have experienced centuries of genocide by the Europeans.

Can you imagine if the genocides never happened? The Americas and Australasia would be even more diverse than they are now. They would easily rival Africa and Asia.

Turning them female and not-white

When I say ‘them’, I am referring to fictional characters. And I am against changing their gender and race.

But, not for the reason most people have.

I don’t give a fuck if the changes defy the original ideas. If it is acceptable for white actors to portray actual non-white historical figures, then it SHOULD be acceptable to change the gender and race of fictional and definitely not real characters!

I am opposed to the change because it is insulting to racial minorities in the west and women.

If the studio executives really do care about being inclusive, they would demand the creations of new and original hero characters which women and non-white actors can portray. They would never hand them roles that are basically leftovers.

If anything, it shows how they don’t have the desire to respect identities that are not white and male. It shows how they are entirely motivated by profit instead of genuine sense of social inclusivity. It is all about lucrative pandering.

Admittedly, it is not as bad as the tokenism in which they create non-white and/or female characters mostly as punchlines or sidekicks and barely have compelling stories of their own. It is dehumanising to be seen as nothing but money-generating pigeon-holed props.

I acknowledge it as a leap forward. But, considering it is only a few inches forward, it is not worthy the celebration.

This celebration is akin to me patting myself on the back for exercising and having strict diet just for one day.

It is akin to perceiving Saudi Arabia’s decriminalisation of women drivers as a catalyst for the Muslim world when the rest of the Muslim world never ban them from driving in the first place.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

How to report problem countries

Obviously, every country is a problem country. And yes, including the so-called number one country, the so-called United States of America.

In this context, I am referring to countries like Iran and North Korea which are known for their severe human rights violations and have been extensively and negatively covered by foreign (mostly western) media.

  • I hate sugar-coating. I believe exposing the factual negative aspects of certain countries is not inherently hateful; there is nothing wrong about sticking to the truth.
  • But, it can be hateful when we insist the coverage must be entirely negative and are offended by the idea of showcasing genuine positivity because we want to keep affirming any prevailing preconceived notions.
  • I first noticed this when I watched the North Korean episodes of Departure, a traveling TV show which focuses less on the destinations and more on the journeys; they received backlashes for allegedly spewing pro-North Korea propaganda.

    Correct me if I am wrong. But, from my knowledge, a country’s propaganda should brag about its non-existing divine perfection and work as the ruling government’s ideological mouthpiece.

    Departure does none of those things.

    While the hosts did not mention the human rights violations of the countries they visited, they also never tried to paint them in an entirely positive light.

    The show is entirely non-political. The hosts only care about exploring nature and interacting with the locals; the latter is the theme of the North Korean episodes.

    If anything, I believe the show does the ordinary and unprivileged ordinary North Koreans a great favour.

    Because of the lack of political agenda, the white Anglo-Canadian hosts had no problems interacting with a group of East Asians who grew up isolated from the rest of the world. The resulting interactions were wonderfully wholesome.

    The episodes do not depict cultural clashes, they depict people who enjoy each other’s presence despite the linguistic and cultural barriers.

    They depict humans who see each other as fellow human beings.

    But, some people didn’t like it. They believed the only way to give the North Koreans a favour was to focus entirely on the system that oppressed them.

    I disagree with that belief.

    North Korea is not just an obscure country that most people haven’t heard of; they have, albeit sometimes mistaking it for its sibling down south. Because of that, negative media coverage is not only common, it is over-saturated.

    The over-saturation results in the dehumanisation of the North Korean people. Let’s face it: most of us don’t see North Korea as a country where fellow humans live, they see it as a giant oppressive machine that must be destroyed at all cost.

    And, whether you believe or not, this kind of dehumanisation already has a negative effect on the state of humanity.

    It is not a secret that many people, especially neoconservative westerners, support invasions of repressive countries like North Korea without any regards of innocent casualties; I mean, if they really care, they would not get aroused by the idea of violent invasions and would not perceive any innocent casualties as mere “collateral damage”.

    While I don’t pay as much attention to it, I also notice the same thing with how western media treats Iran.

    The humanisation of the Iranian people is way more well-received. But, unfortunately, the demand for dehumanisation prevails among the politically-outspoken degenerates.

    Many still refuse to see Iran as a place where humans live… which is why, just like in the case of North Korea, they are not hesitant to support violent military interventions against it.

    I do have my own solution to deal with this problem. But, not only it is made by a non-expert, it is also rather tricky to implement.

    If a country has been almost entirely negatively reported by foreign media and you want to make a documentary (or something similar) about it instead of a normal news report, there are two things you can do.

    The first thing you can do is to cover positive things about said country and tell the world its previously unknown faces.

    And when I say “positive”, I mean genuinely so. They should be based on facts instead of the political establishments’ rhetorics. You have to make sure the presentation of positivity does not paint the country in an entirely positive light.

    Youtuber Louis Cole AKA FunForLouis made a series of vlogs of him and his friends visiting North Korea. Even though I was never subscriber, I was intrigued…. and was quickly disappointed.

    Obviously, I should watch the sequels as well. But, in the end of the first video, he said North Korea was not as bad as people claimed simply because he and his friends were greeted with a touristy welcome; at that moment, he seemed to perceive a choreographed performance as an excellent representation of the reality.

    I was already repulsed about those overtly-polished Youtube vlogs. Cole’s ignorant comment only intensified my repulsion.

    Departures has proven that, if you use your brain a bit more and don’t easily fall for deceptive veneers, you can shed a positive light on an oppressive country without becoming its government’s propaganda tool.

    But, if you are reasonable iffy about making positive coverage and still prefer to do a negative one, I have a second tip: find a fresh angle.

    If you keep repeating the same real life horror stories, the only thing you would be good at is affirming simplistic prejudgements about North Korea and discouraging outsiders from humanising the victims due to the lack of nuances.

    I think the Youtube channel Asian Boss does a great job in getting the fresh angles. Instead of treating their North Korean interviewees as propaganda tools to exploit, they treat them as individuals with human stories to tell.

    As a result, not only it results in ethically-dignified documentaries, it also unearths surprising facts about the country they are defecting from.

    For instance, even though the consumption of foreign media is prohibited in general, I did not know that consumption of South Korean media will result in more severe punishments than the consumption of western one. It confirms one of our preconceived notions…. but, in a rather complex way.

    I specifically said this tip is only for those who make documentaries and the likes and NOT for journalists who solely make daily and relatively short reports.

    Why? Because it is obvious that my tips, especially the second one, require in-depth analyses and cannot be simply done in less than a day or even a week.

    Well, they can. But, the results would be sloppy.

    Okay, I am aware of how horrible my suggestions are; not only I have zero experiences in the media industry, my words are not precise and technical enough to be practically useful. Heck, even if I am a highly-experienced professional, my suggestions would not be the be-all and end-all.

    But, even then, the unreliability of my tips does not mean the media industry is perfect as it is. Every person with functioning brain cells knows mediocrity and lacking integrity are embraced as virtues.

    Public discourses about the ethics of depicting authoritarian countries are almost non-existent and, for reasons I have mentioned in this essay, it is something to be reasonably angry about.

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

  • Feminists and anti-feminists: a common ground

    *puts on a mask*

    Some people support feminism because they believe it is the most effective way to coerce women into embracing western liberal values.

    They shame women who willingly embrace modest fashion, who willingly choose to become stay-at-home moms, who willingly choose to become abstinent and who willingly choose to become/stay religious.

    Their reasoning? They want to liberate women from the oppressive and medieval eastern values, especially the Islamic ones.

    Some people oppose feminism because they want to protect women from western values and coerce them to keep embracing eastern values, particularly the Islamic ones.

    They shame women who willingly show the slightest appearances of their skin, hair and bodily curves, who willingly choose to be unmarried and childless and who willingly choose to have active sex lives.

    Their reasoning? They want to liberate women from the oppressive and overtly-sexualised western liberal values.

    I have to a suggestion for both feminists and anti-feminists:

    Why don’t you just make peace with each other?

    I mean, it is quite obvious how you actually have something in common with each other: you are advocating to take women’s right to think and act for themselves under the pretense of liberating them.

    Wouldn’t your goals become easier to achieve when you find a common ground with the “others” and form a gigantic and influential alliance?

    Together, you can oppress women to the fullest.

    *takes off the mask*

    .

    .

    .

    .

    Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

    Is Pewdiepie a member of the alt-right?

    The answer is a definite no. If you actually watch his videos that are used as evidences by the media against him, you would know he was (and still is) being smeared.

    Felix ‘Certainly-Not-Hitler’ Kjellberg

    The video Fiverr video was never meant to be hateful. He found the idea of paying people to do anything for five dollars was ridiculous; when he paid the men to hold the ‘Death To All Jews’ sign, he did not expect them to actually do it.

    In fact, he was horrified when they actually did. I know because I actually watched his reaction; contrary to popular belief, he was certainly not delighted and he was certainly not bursting into a laughter. He realised that he had just committed a horrible recklessness.

    I also don’t get why people think making Nazi jokes makes one an actual Nazi. It is not. Call me heretical, but I believe jokes can be just… you know… jokes; they are not always representatives of the jokers’ actual viewpoints. If that’s the case, then Ben Fritz, the Wall Street Journal reporter who smeared him, is also an anti-Semite for making Jewish jokes as well.

    Oh, and the allegedly anti-Semitic channel he was giving shout-out to, I cannot say if it really was considering I have not watched a single video. But, if the Youtuber behind it is indeed just a giant edgelord who love making edgy jokes, then it is not a channel that promotes anti-Semitism.

    The ‘Bros’

    Regarding the mosque shooter who said ‘subscribe to Pewdiepie’ before committing his horrible acts, many argued he mentioned the meme (as the Pewdiepie vs T-Series ‘rivalry’ was and still is raging) just to bring more infamy to himself. But, even if he was a sincere fan, I still don’t believe Felix is at fault here.

    Not only he was quick to condemn the violence, he also has a history with condemning the irrational branch of his own fandom and that makes him hated by his ex-fans; he is one of those Youtubers who no longer appeases to fans. He is certainly different from Trump, who is not only willing to condemn violence done in his name, but also has called his Neo-Nazi supporters ‘fine people’.

    He also condemned his fans for being racist against Indians just because the T-Series channel is from India; he even countered the racism by having a charity livestream where he and his not-racist fans donated to Indian children. He has been making charity livestreams for years, which, of course, the media love to ignore and are more interested in his income.

    Ben-Ben

    People are also mad at Felix for featuring Ben Shapiro in one of his videos. Well, I am personally annoyed because I see him as an insufferable pundit who certainly does not care about facts despite claiming to do so; Felix certainly could have chosen a better public figure. But, does this count as a promotion of the far-right ideology? No, it doesn’t.

    One thing for sure, while he is indeed very conservative, Shapiro is also a critic of Donald Trump -the alt-right’s favourite politician- and he, an actual Jew, has experience anti-Semitic abuse from actual members of the alt-right. He is certainly not one of them.

    Also, Shapiro was not given a platform to spew his political beliefs; he was there just to review memes. Felix is not one of those Youtubers and journalists whose intention to expose far-right individuals is not accompanied by intellectual rigour and willingness to drop their own ideological propensity, resulting in recklessly giving the extremists unchallenged platforms. Never mind far-right politics, Felix never gives one to its more moderate counterparts.

    The n-word ‘oopsie’

    Well, he did use the N-word on a gaming livestream and I cannot defend that; it was wrong for him to do it. But, I disagree the usage of any slurs instantly makes one bigoted; it may also means one is a reckless edgelord and he is certainly one. Not to mention he used the N-word against a fellow player whose race was unknown; he dropped the word purely out of frustration.

    And I think his apology video is excellent. While Felix said it was not that great, people praised him for not making the video unnecessarily long, going straight to the point, owning up to his mistake and acknowledging his inability to learn from past controversies. Even to this day, I am still unable to make such sincere apology.

    Thot thot thot thot thot

    Oh, and don’t forget the misogyny accusation because he called Alinity, a female Twitch streamer, a ‘thot’. While he indeed called her such, he did not do so simply because she showed her cleavage; he called her a ‘thot’ because she attracted viewership by using nothing but her sexual appeal. So, like it or not, she is a thot.

    Her defenders also ignore this one fact: Alinity copyright struck Felix’s video, despite him not breaking any copyright rules, while she was on her livestream with a fucking smirk on her face. Basically, she was not psychologically hurt by being called a thot; she was just using the situation to steal another person’s income and she even openly admitted she had abused the system many times. To this day, it is sad she is still being defended by people whose only source of info is that slanderous Vice article.

    Her defenders also ignore ItsSkyLol, another female Twitch streamer who not only defended Felix, but also vented about how Alinity and her likes provoke horny male viewers to watch female streamers and expecting them to be their personal sex toys. If anything, Felix respect women more than Alinity’s defenders do.

    The missing data

    There is one 2014 episode of his now-defunct podcast where he was horrified by the rise of a racist and homophobic party in his home country of Sweden. But, sadly, that particular episode has been made private on Youtube and the entire podcast series is missing from SoundCloud.

    For some time, I thought the missing episode would be enough to convince the more reasonable branch of his detractors that he is not a racist. But, not only the episode was created five years ago, some of the criticism against him is unfortunately valid.

    When the ‘haters’ are right

    Like it or not, arts and entertainment do have real-life implications.

    Both, especially the latter, either affirm already-established societal beliefs or tell us to embrace certain beliefs, especially regarding gender, race and religion. They can be a force of good. But, we know damn well they are a bad influence most of the time.

    I am all for edgy jokes. But, I also believe there is a time and a place for everything. Felix is a white Youtuber of western-upbringing who lives in the west, a part of the world where far-right politics is on the rise. Is it really wise of him to make Nazi jokes for the sake of being edgy?

    Apart from the Christchurch terrorist (whose status as an actual Pewdiepie fan is doubted by many), I have not found a single evidence where Felix is admired by Neo-Nazis (unlike Trump who is beloved by them). But, just because he is not their favourite Youtuber, that does not mean he can’t be.

    Just like how making ‘racist’ jokes (mind the airquotes) does not make the jokers racist, I also don’t think loving the jokes make us racist as well (and I wish SJWs should learn nuanced thinking). But, it also does not mean actual racists won’t love the jokes.

    Why wouldn’t they? The content of the jokes clearly indulges their racism. In fact, I am sure they are glad the certain public figures make ‘racist’ jokes, especially when they are made for the sake of being offensive and lack some satirical elements.

    And, in this era, Neo-Nazis are already politically empowered by the likes of Trump holding government positions. The last thing we need is for them to be culturally empowered, for them to believe the entertainment establishment tolerate their ideology. Eventually, they will be even more immensely motivated to spread their extreme ideology to the numerically-abundant impressionable individuals.

    That’s why I also don’t have any good rebuttals when Oliver Thorn of Philosophy Tube implicitly call him the most famous Swedish Youtuber who spreads anti-Semitic messages. Twice, if I remember correctly.

    Oh, and as a non-Jew, I don’t have the right to decide whether Jewish jokes are offensive or not. The only ones who do are the Jews. They are the actual targets of the jokes. While non-Jews can voice their opinions as well, we certainly don’t know how it feels to be Jews and we certainly only speak for ourselves.

    Replace ‘Jews’ with other groups of people and my statement still stands.

    What IF he is a racist?

    Well, just take a look at those far-right politicians. Trump’s minions deny he is anything but a petulant, Nazi-tolerating and misogynist bully, despite the abundance of incriminating evidences in the forms of videos and his own tweets. Jair Bolsonaro’s minions deny he is anything but a misogynist, racist and homophobic dictator-wannabe who wants to destroy the environment, despite the fact it is the reason why he was famous in the first place!

    And the same thing can happen to Felix’s fandom.

    While I admittedly still fall for fake or patchily-reported news, I have learned to accept my idols as flawed human beings by rejecting their divine status. So, despite my fervent defence of Felix, I believe he can be (can be, not is) a horrible person and I have to brace myself if (if) he is revealed as a horrible human being; the earnestness of his words can be corroborated on the way he speaks, another thing his detractors willfully ignore.

    But then, I am speaking for myself. We all know how fandoms behave. In spite of Felix’s increasing maturity over the years, some of his fans still defend him with such zeal no matter what, even if he is a (hypothetical) Neo-Nazi. And the media are not helping either.

    They have been either petty or slanderous against him (and Youtubers in general) for many years. When they are not busy spewing pseudo-progressivism, they are too busy focusing on his wealth and implicitly encouraging their undoubtedly more traditional viewers/readers to despise the man who makes a living out of a so-called ‘not-real’ job. The media seed contempt among the minds of many Youtube fans.

    And the contempt provides fans ammunition to attack the media. Every single Youtube news reported by the media will be disregarded as ‘fake’, regardless of their accuracy. Not only the media’s endeavour to get rid of their biggest industry rivals includes shooting their own feet, they will sway Youtube fans away from acknowledging potentially harsh truths about their idols.

    If (if) Felix Kjellberg AKA Pewdiepie explicitly and unambiguously expose himself as a white supremacist and the story is picked up by the media, many on Youtube will never believe it.

    Why should they believe the same entity who is infamous for spreading falsehood?

    Conclusion

    We can learn two things from this:

    First, when one is a public figure, be careful with one’s actions and words. Like it or not, one will be seen as a role model by some members of the masses. Individuals have definitely become better or worse, thanks to their role models.

    Second, a journalist must take his/her title seriously by actually embracing objectivity and pursuing truth. He/she must learn that having agendas like ‘looking progressive’ and ‘getting rid of the competitors’ does not make one a journalist. It makes one a pundit. An insecure one of that.

    Okay, I make it sound like Felix and the media are equally in the wrong here. While I do criticise him, the content of his videos has become less recklessly edgy and more well-thought-out. He actually has made efforts to become a better, more responsible public figure. Compared that to the media.

    At first, they tried to discredit him by pettily focused on his wealth. When that did not destroy his career, they took advantage of the rise of far-right movements by slandering him as a fervent supporter. None of them have yet to apologise and, every time they make a slanderous report of him, they also make sure their viewers/readers remember his past controversies.

    Basically, not only they don’t have any guilt, they will keep doing it until they have reached their end goal.

    And yet, they have to gall to be angry when the public call them ‘fake journalists’.

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger onĀ Patreon.