This post is a response to an academic paper Inter-ethnic Racisms in Aotearoa:A Study of South Asian Communities in New Zealand by Cayathri Divakalala and Rachel Simon-Kumar that was sent to us.
(Click on the link above in bright pink to read the paper and our detailed comments.)
Aotearoa Alliance of Progressive Indians (AAPI) has been resisting discrimination in the Indian diaspora of Aotearoa for more than five years now. We are a loose, informal collective of diverse people with Indian whakapapa who resist Hindutva, the Hindu fascist ideology and its multiple avatars, in different ways. Our kaupapapa also includes documenting the discrimination, Hindu fascist methodologies, the people and their organisations. We call out government/political inertia and endeavour to educate mainstream society. Our activists cut across class, caste, religion, region, language and gender.
That is why an academic research paper analysing discriminations in South Asian communities is of interest to us and we shared it with our activists for feedback. Does this paper reflect the issues in our communities? Are there any solutions?
The verdict was unanimous. This is a shoddy piece of academic research. We had to respond. Because we know this paper will be sent to various ministries, government agencies and councils who, being the Pākeha organisations they are, will take it seriously, without thinking hence further harming our communities. After all this research was funded by MBIE, the ministry of business, innovation and enterprise.
Before we start we want the readers to know that a core AAPI principle is to ensure that our marginalised people who must be able to express their concerns while staying safe. Hence our posts are often under the broad APPI name as this one is.
We will enumerate the issues rather than elaborate because we are not academics and we do not have the capacity to counter-argue. However, we urge the readers to click on the link above to see the pdf file with comments from our activists some of whom have clearly lost patience by the end of it.
The paper talks about South Asian communities but fails to correctly define the region, then focuses only on the diaspora of the subcontinent before inserting an Afghan just for the purpose of manipulating the quantitative data. The authors conflate South Asia and the subcontinent constantly. The sample size is also too small and does not give us a breakdown of the whakapapa of the participants.
- We know through our various protests and activist mahi that neither Rachel Simon-Kumar nor Cayathri Divakalala have ever shown any interest in what discrimination is at the grassroots level. No relationship building, no developing trust, no humility or listening to the people. Cayathri has researched South Asian queer communities through Adhikaar Aotearoa that she co-founded but the Adhikar Report from 2022 does not define South Asia or talk about the intersection of Hindutva, caste, class, language, region or religion. You can be queer, casteist and exclusionary. Like Indian Origin Pride which is made up of upper caste Hindus that have never put their bodies on the line for rainbow struggles, never shown solidarity with any queer resistance and yet benefit from legislations like marriage equality in Aotearoa.
- Both authors are dangerously ignorant about ‘Khalistan’. We put this in quote marks because they needed to go back to the 1970s and early 1980s Punjab, know about Operation Bluestar, know about the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the subsequent Sikh pogrom and the recent farmers protests in India resisting the Modi government’s farm acts before making a statement like: “The recent resurgence of the Khalistani separatist movement within parts of the Sikh diaspora has exacerbated tensions with Hindu communities.” These words are incredibly harmful. First, there is no resurgence of the Khalistani separatist movement. This was a bogeyman created by Hindutva adherents to attack protesting farmers and label them terrorists. Second, the tension was created by Hindu extremists to generate fear. Do not brush the ‘Hindu community’ as a monolith.
Our advice to the authors-educate yourself on Indian history and contemporary socio-political issues. Simply attending Indian community protests in support of the farmers here in Aotearoa would have enlightened you. Your illiteracy is irresponsible and perpetuates violence against the Sikh community.
- Let’s talk about Hindutva. This deserves a book-about how privileged academics talk about ‘inter-ethnic racisms’ without naming the poison! These authors fail to define Hindutva and how it manifests even as they quote Sneha Singh talking about Hindutva’s chameleon-like abilities to transform. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the mothership of Hindutva, celebrates a century of existence this year 2025! And we have an Indian academic, Rachel Simon-Kumar, researching ethnic communities stay mum. Is she afraid or does not care because it apparently does not affect her? Or, is it that delving into Hindutva will affect her funding opportunities and access to the 'community leaders' with whom she works? Real community work is about naming those that harm people. Not beat around the bush. No kudos in that. It is a sign of weakness. And ego. The Pākeha at whom this research is aimed will not ask about it. They never do. That is why we have taxpayer funded vegetarian only public Diwali events under the name of multiculturalism. Rachel does disservice to our people with her deliberate omission about Hindutva. But if you talk about the racism in the community the community will ask about Hindutva.
Our suggestion to the authors-name Hindutva. One cannot do research on racism/discrimination/tensions within subcontinental communities without talking about Hindutva. What it is, the people who propagate this in Aotearoa, their organisations and the multiple avatars. Hindutva is a global threat. It works with white supremacy and Zionism. Hindutva actively harms our minority communities and even those Hindus who stand up against it. Hindutva erases pluralism. Therefore, it is ironic the authors use buzz words like diversity, inclusion, social cohesion etc while participating in the erasure themselves.
- Then we come to caste. Any Indian and/or subcontinental academic who works in this area will know to begin by talking about their location in the caste hierarchy and their position on it. We wish to emphasise here that even non-Hindu Indians practice caste discrimination and anyone saying they don’t know their caste are very privileged. Anyone who says they do not need to reveal their position are using their privilege to extract from the caste oppressed. (That these authors use the term ‘low caste’ rather than caste oppressed is evidence enough of their lack of engagement and knowledge, rather their caste privilege.) We ask, what is the authors’ location and positionality? Otherwise, this mahi is a mere superficial exercise to gain currency around activist work and grassroots resistance grounded in the oppressed communities. It is obvious the authors have not done any work on caste. Or BR Ambedkar would be central to this paper. It is Brahmanical/upper caste behaviour where one takes for granted their privilege such that they parachute into a community and take away what they think is enough to use for themselves.
Our recommendations to the authors: Learn from Māori and Pasifika academics. Embed yourself in the community, check your class, caste and other privileges, de-centre yourself, be humble, build trusting relationships, listen to the minorities and marginalised, ensure their safety first only then endeavour to write. We suggest looking up American sociologist Gail Omvedt although you should already know her work since you are writing about caste and racisms. Be like Gail.
Finally, while we agree that there must be more Tiriti education and connections with tangata whenua to create belonging and potentially reduce racisms, just saying that is not a solution per se. The solution is to find ways to do that, which you failed to ask your respondents. How do we develop community led solidarities with each other and to resist colonial forces?
We are shocked that this research paper, that we would potentially mark as a D, was even published. That the advisor esteemed professor emeritus Sekhar Bandyopadhaya approved it. That Jennifer Janif perhaps lacks critical insight, and the third advisor is a government person stooge (so their opinion does not matter).
We are however not shocked that mischief monger patriarch Venkatraman published it on his platform Indian Newslink or that the authors, all the while talking about intra-ethnic racisms, were agreeable for one of our senior most racists to appropriate it. That entails another post though. Coming soon.
Recommended readings for those interested:
1. Annihilation of Caste by BR Ambedkar
2. https://tif.ssrc.org/2022/10/19/hindutva-appropriations-of-indigeneity/
3. https://www.nationthailand.com/blogs/more/commentary/40031317
4. Girmitiyas by Brij V Lal
5-The novel Train To Pakistan by Khushwant Singh
