And while The Economist is preferable to just about every other widely read journal of record, it is amazingly prone to White God syndrome and a particular form of moral blindness which leads to a conception of Empire as a civilizing tool. Far too much of The Economist's pages are devoted to the idea that those crazy foreigners would be better off if they were just more like us.

Time's not a bad periodical, despite Joel Stein's regular column. I prefer the Atlantic or TNR for my general interest magazines.

I think the intent of the article was to show that what can seem strange and new at first becomes normal over time. Once in America the strange foreigners were the Italians with their strange food like pasta and pizza, but now this things are part of American culture. The same thing is happening with Indian culture. I think something to be racist there needs to be intent. I don't think there was any intent in that article. Just an attempt at humor which fell flat.

Typos above... but now *these things have become part of American culure.... I think *for something to be racist there needs to be intent...

I think something can be racist without intent, but I'm obviously much more, uh, cool (sorry, I couldn't think of a better word, I know) to that sort of thing.
And why all the love for The Economist?
1. It barely covers economic articles (it is generally more of a business periodical)
2. It's as right-wing and pro-business as the Wall Street Journal (well, some people will see that as a positive). Very unbiased there.

@spyman: I disagree re intent.

largeham, can you explain how something can be racist without intent?
To illustrate what I mean, African Americans used to be referred to as negros, but now this word is considered racist. If someone who is not from America uses the word negro, without realizing that the term is no longer considered polite, are they being racist? I would say no. What do you think?
Another example is the Australia KFC ad which showed supporters of the West Indian cricket team eating fried chicken. The ad was considered racist by Americans because they have this stereo type about african americans and fried chicken. But Australians do not have this stereotype, thus the ad, in Australia, had no racist intent. Thus it was not racist.

So, Spyman, are you saying I can go and walk around the world naked and touch random men/women/children on the street inappropriately just because (suppose) this is the way things are done in my house/culture/community/country? That is a stupid argument. There are different cultures in the world and in an age where cultures are colliding it's probably a good thing to know a thing or two about how others feel about things before shooting your mouth off, irrespective of whether or not you might think what you're saying is OK. Your argument is an extremely selfish one.

I say go for it ava.




------------------------------

Just kidding. Some people just need to read the fine lines between stereotyping and hatred. This is definitely stereotyping, and is harmless until someone takes it out of context.

I don't think that is what I am saying at all. I think that we should try to be sensitive to other cultures. So if you go to America and use the word negro knowing that it is impolite and use the word, then that would be wrong.

I see where you're going with that argument. But might I remind you, spyman, that in this article the author bloody well knew about the culture he was talking about because he went to school with them and played D&D with them or whatever. So what do you have to say about that? That he somehow didn't know what he was getting into while throwing around racial slurs casually?

The author was unwise to write the article and the magazine unwise to publish it. But I don't think the article was intended to denigrate Indians. I think he was trying to show parallels between the acceptance of Italian culture in America and the acceptance of Indian culture.

That's sort of what I mean. I mean that the article is racist to towards Indians, but it isn't meant specifically and deliberately to insult them. I would write further, but I have to leave soon.

On a side note, my parents would blow their top if they read that, and probably smash the computer screen :(

See what I mean? I think a large majority of Indian expatriates are both proud of their heritage and place heavy emphasis on work ethics and family values...in other words, they care a whole lot about their 'honour', as they'd say back home. My grouse isn't against the 'humor' element. I just don't think this is what journalism should be.

Um, I thought it was pretty obvious that the article was more a satire of the stereotypes and prejudices many Amercans have of Indian immigrants than of Indian immigrants themselves... If anything, he is mocking white New Jersey, but more so pointing out the absurdity in stereotyping.

Yes, he used terms like "dot head", but instead of the natural knee jerk reaction, maybe the context ought to be examined? He was clearly drawing a connection between people who use the term "dot head" to people who were uneducated or unintelligent, and it's pretty obvious that he knows that Ganesh and Siva are separate gods but mixes them up purposely to illustrate the typical ignorance of racists.

As a disclaimer, I'm not white, which apparently magically gives me more credence in my opinion regarding racial issues. Maybe I would be offended if I were Indian, but I feel that if a similar article were written regarding Chinese immigrants, while I could definitely count on my parent's blood boiling, I think I'd be able to recognize the literary techniques common in satire.

Please, chrisp, your patronizing tone and implications that I am somehow stupid (or at least uneducated in satire) does not really contribute towards your argument. I write for a satire magazine myself (http://www.shadydealer.uchicago.edu). We've published some politically incorrect and outright crazy shit. But look me in the eye and tell me that that was a completely correct forum to do it in; that the glorification of crime as some sort of rite of passage for white youths and statements such as "no wonder India is so damn poor" (which shows complete lack of understanding of the depth of the problem) are somehow OK to use in satire.

He's not glorifying crime. He's mocking the people who somehow, probably nostalgically, believe that the old establishments were better than the new Indian ones by reducing the old establishments to little more than locales for petty theft. He's precisely exalting the new establishments by saying that a generation of white folk have nowhere to learn crime, which is clearly a good thing.

He's not personally saying that's why "India is so damn poor", he's precisely mocking the complete lack of understanding of the depth of the problem that many people in New Jersey have.

I'm not saying that it's a brilliant piece of satire by any means, or even a good one, but it is what it is, and I do think if you're offended it's because you've read it in the wrong tone or misunderstand the character of the piece. This is not to say you are stupid or uneducated... I said in the same post I would expect my own parents to be extremely offended by an analagous piece, and I would certainly not call my parents stupid or uneducated. It is simply that when it comes to racial issues involving the Chinese people, they tend to have a natural knee jerk reaction. My Dad froths at the mouth of you make an innocent joke about Taiwanese independence.

I just think it's worth taking a step back and examining the real tone behind the piece before you condemn it for the exact things it sets out to ridicule.

He was a bit ignorant, that's for sure.

I do like the rant of Parikh: 'the statue of Liberty may shed a tear, Gandhi already did'.

Chrisp what does your dad think about Taiwanese independence?

@spy - Well assuming Chrisp's dad is Chinese, and from what Chrisp said, I guess his dad would be rather anti-Taiwanese/ROC independence. There's still some major political tensions flaring between Chinese/Taiwanese people from that generation from what I can gather from my Chinese/Taiwanese friends.

That the two words have no place near each other. =P

@ ava: about the crime issue, that's not gloryfying crime in any way, just a sarcastic approach to nostalgia.

I do find the article recognizable, about how you return to your home town to find it engulfed in a culture which is not yours. It's not about judging that culture but a certain and perhaps naive nostalgia.

Um

How do you make an innocent joke about Taiwanese independence?

"Knock knock, who's there?"
"Chinese"
"Chinese who?"
"Chinese Taipei!"

ahahahahaha not. :)

@ava

I am terribly sorry if my reading of the article insulted you in any way - this was not my intent. I do understand that race is a big deal for some people - on both sides (racists and people who have to deal with racism).

Having said that, and maybe it's because I've had the luxury to be brought up in a way that ignores race as a factor for anything (plus I'm white, so haven't really had the chance to be a victim), I do feel that people tend to be a bit too sensitive about this, even when there's no need.

My parents are also a bit racist - and I really hate that. Does this mean they are stupid and brainwashed - well, to a certain degree yes, it does - but I still love them and they are generally nice people. I've explained them this and they do agree with me that being racist is stupid - but as they say "it's part of who they are". I guess when you're 60 it's hard to change - and what they are is the result of their life experiences - so I guess they have some excuse.

I don't expect everyone to have the same point of view as me - as I said, it's a luxury - but you really cannot expect me to join in in this witch-hunt. I don't approve of political correctness - it's like treating skin irritations with cosmetics...

For what it matters I hope this discussion will be of some help, so that next time you see something like this you'll first take a step back before your bloods starts to boil.

"We're only as good as the things that make us angry" :)

@Chrisp - I think I actually repeated some of what you said above, sorry :)

You're all way too easily offended. It's happening more and more nowadays. I read an interview of Clint Eastwood where he commented on that same phenomena. He called it the "Pussy Generation" of Americans, who bitch and moan about everything. I happen to agree with him.

Wow, talk about a fuss over nothing.

The article is clearly not racist. It is making fun of racial stereotypes, not endorsing them. I actually think it's quite amusing. Anyone who considers this racist or offensive to anyone but white Novojersians is being remarkably ignorant.