Listen to an excerpt of "And So this is Christian" from The Brave New World of Goan Writing & Art, edited by Selma Carvalho and published by CinnamonTeal.
A blog with diasporic proclivities: Goa and the World, South Asian Americana, and Afro-Asiatic connections.
Showing posts with label Police Brutality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Police Brutality. Show all posts
Friday, September 18, 2020
Saturday, March 5, 2016
"For King and Country" - THE GOAN: I'm Not Here (6 March 2016)
It
has been twenty five years since the Rodney King beating in Los Angeles. The
event continues to resonate internationally, especially given recent events in
India.
The
3rd of March, 2016 marked the 25th
anniversary of the late Rodney King’s beating
by Los Angeles police officers. Over a year later in May 1992, the tumultuous
scenes of civil unrest in Los Angeles could not have felt any closer to home,
even as my family and I watched them on the television in Goa. The newscaster
offered a recap of the story that we had been following intently since April.
Tensions had flared in the aftermath of the verdict in the King beating trial.
Despite videotaped evidence by George Holliday who lived near where the beating
had taken place, the jury exonerated the policemen responsible for violently
assaulting the black motorist. The acquitted policemen, as well as the jury,
had been all white. In a year, we would be emigrating to the United States. Los
Angeles was our destination. And, like King, my first name is Rodney.
King was so much a part of my
consciousness that I would often introduce myself as “Rodney… You know… like
King? Rodney King?” I needed the
added qualification because, as I was told on more than one occasion, it was
odd that someone of my racial background would have “a name like that.” In a
city as diverse as Los Angeles, multiculturalism does not equate with awareness
or the lack of segregation, and the same could be said for the many places I
have called home across the world, India included.
During the unrest, when King famously
made his televised plea for the people of his city to “get along,” his
statement became the stuff of legendary ridicule. Was it that the notion of
co-existing amicably was so simplistic, or that the sentiment had come from an
ordinary black man with a rap sheet who had been beaten by the police? What the
incident had done was to raise questions about police brutality and whose
rights the keepers of the peace were protecting. For South Asian Americans,
among members of other ethnic communities, similar issues of racial profiling
and civil rights violations rose to a crescendo in the aftermath of the 9/11
terror attacks. Racial injustice may not be unique to any one minority group,
but it is this very ubiquity of violence that should make us more mindful of
its existence, as well as the role the state plays in using violence to
undermine the rights of minorities.
Echoes of the legacy of King’s beating
can be heard 25 years later in the contemporary United States where the Black Lives Matters
movement continues to draw attention to the
deaths of Black people at the hands of law enforcement. Similarly, the movement
incited by the January death of Dalit scholar Rohith
Vemula in India has underscored how
state-backed educational institutions perpetuate upper caste privilege while
turning a blind eye to the plight of Dalit students. It is no coincidence that
in the Vemula moment, charges of anti-nationalism have been levied against
those on campuses that have been allegedly involved in questioning abuses
of state power. Even so, it is
essential to note that current discussions of political dissent and freedom of
speech cannot
stand in for the struggles of Kashmiris or
Dalits.
King’s arrest still resonates
internationally 25 years later as evidence of how it is often the targets of
state violence who bear the brunt of having to prove their victimisation. If
even after his death, there continue to be efforts to depoliticise Vemula’s
suicide through ludicrous claims
by the police that he was not actually Dalit,
there are parallels to be drawn to the fashion in which Black victims of police
violence in the United States find themselves having to prove their lack of
criminality. In her article “Endangered/Endangering: Schematic Racism and White
Paranoia” (1993), Judith Butler explains how King’s body was made synonymous
with a threat that required policing to ensure white safety. Similarly in
India, Dalit bodies become the site of recognition of upper caste privilege; in
effect, saying Vemula may not have been Dalit attempts to reduce upper caste
culpability in his death.
While King’s beating highlighted the
racialised nature of state-sponsored violence, it was never his intention to be
a cause célèbre. “Long after your case is
closed, you are going to have to be Rodney King for the rest of your life. Do
you think you can handle that?” attorney Steven Lerman had asked his client,
the Los Angeles Times reported in a
story following King’s death in 2012.
“Steve, I just don’t know,” King replied. The article also quotes an earlier
interview in which King mused, “People look at me like I should have been like
Malcolm X or Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks … But it's hard to live up to
some people's expectations...” King was an ordinary man upon whom national
attention had been thrust. Yet, 25 years later, his story still bears
relevance. The same will be true of Rohith Vemula, an ordinary man whose mind
was “a
glorious thing made up of stardust”,
a young person who could not live long enough to see things change, but one who
hoped his death would not be in vain.
From The Goan.
Thursday, March 26, 2015
"Is Milk in my Coffee a Racial Metaphor?" - THE GOAN: I'm Not Here (21 March 2015)

I fear my skillset has been rendered
redundant and that all prospects for my employability have been lost. What has
given rise to this panic, you ask? The announcement that the American coffee company
Starbucks, which boasts a global presence, has now positioned itself as an
expert on race. Earlier this week, the company announced that it was going to
initiate a programme called “Race Together”, wherein baristas at 12,000
Starbucks locations across the United States would engage patrons in
conversations about race. Who knew that all it would take to end oppression was
a nice chat over a cup of coffee? And what does this say for those of us who
work on race-related issues, but are no good at making a decent cup of joe?
When I acquired my Masters in Asian
American Studies from UCLA, it was with the awareness that that degree was
conferred upon me by an educational entity that had been borne out of the
political struggle of the US Civil Rights movement. Indeed, the legendary
Campbell Hall where my MA programme shared space with other Ethnic Studies
centres, such as the Native American, African American, and Chicano Studies
programmes, was the site where John Huggins and Bunchy Carter – members of the Black
Panther Party who were UCLA students – had been slain in 1969. It would be
revealed that the FBI had had a hand in the murders.
Thanks to my MA in the study of race, I
went on to acquire work where I could analyse how effective high school
programmes were at catering to the specific learning needs of multicultural
student bodies. And, in case you were wondering, the answer is not very well. But
as simply rendered as that answer seems, it was arrived at after a great deal
of data-collection and analysis at my first post-graduate school job, which was
with the Los Angeles Unified School District. The team I was part of hoped that
in answering that question, which seemed like a foregone conclusion anyway,
that the way would be paved to bring about necessary educational changes. This,
not least because Los Angeles is a city where, as US census data indicates, the
birth rate among minority groups has outstripped that of whites. Now, imagine
having that kind of conversation while buying your cup of coffee as you try to
make it to work on time in the morning!
Don’t get me wrong – this isn’t a
putdown of the capabilities of baristas to, both, get your day started on the
right note with a much needed caffeine boost and to aid dialogue that could
foster community relations. In fact, coffeehouses have quite the history of
being the sites of information exchange, hotbeds of revolution even. Take the
European coffeehouses of the 17th and 18th centuries, for
example, where people gathered precisely because those were the spaces where
news could be sought and conversations had. And these were not always genteel
affairs. On 12 July, 1789, Camille Desmoulins stood atop a table at the Café de
Foy, shouting out a call to arms while, himself, waving two pistols in the air.
“Aux armes, citoyens!”
he is believed to have proclaimed, a moment that would go down in history as
the precursor to the fall of the Bastille a mere two days after. Something
tells me that, in this day and age, getting one’s non-fat soy latte at
Starbucks is not going to inspire the same kind of fervour…
To be fair, however, it has less to do
with political apathy than with what Starbucks itself has come to represent.
Arguably, the popularity of Starbucks lies in its sheer ubiquity rather than in
the quality or taste of its coffee. In most major American cities, one is
guaranteed to find a Starbucks location (or three) in the most well-trafficked
spots, and even in less frequented areas. Like McDonald’s, it’s the place you
go because you know they probably have a restroom you could use without
necessarily having to buy something. To discuss race relations? A less likely
choice.

From The Goan.
Labels:
#RaceTogether,
Black Panthers,
Coffee,
Los Angeles,
Police Brutality,
Starbucks
Monday, March 9, 2015
"Guilty of Walking While Brown" - INDIA CURRENTS (California - March 2015)
On February 6, 2015, an elderly Indian man was left
partially paralyzed following an encounter with the police in Madison, Alabama.
News of the event spread on social media and elsewhere online. When it
became known that a police car had captured video of the incident on its
dashboard camera, an online petition was circulated to exert pressure on the
Madison City Police Department to release the footage. But even before the petition had acquired the threshold
of 1600 signatures it had set itself, the police had made the video public.
Watching the video for the purposes of writing this
article was difficult. At the edge of the screen, one sees Sureshbhai Patel
(57), with his hands behind his back, possibly handcuffed, being thrown to the
ground by officer Eric Parker. Later, when Parker, along with one of the other
officers on the scene, attempts to get Patel to stand up, it becomes apparent
that the “suspect” is unable to, and is literally hauled onto his feet before
sagging back down. Patel, it was discovered, had suffered a neck injury that
would cause him paralysis in some parts of his body.
As the video spread virally, the indignation,
particularly of South Asians, was instantaneous, and rightly so. It would be revealed
that Patel, a citizen of India, had come from that country to help care for his
grandson, born prematurely and, to do so, was living in his son’s home in
Alabama. As more of the story became known, perhaps we likened Patel to members
of our own family. We saw in this grandfather our own parents and grandparents,
those transnationals and migrants who connect our lives between continents. In
fact, I had heard of this case of police brutality from a cousin whose children
my father took care of in Texas. Like Patel, my dad and other relatives like my
aunt and uncle, had come to the States for the function of temporarily helping
out with childcare. And while I appreciate how much coverage the event has
received, there is something about the nature of the conversation around the
incident that leaves me dissatisfied.

“This is a good neighborhood. I didn’t expect
anything to happen,” Chirag Patel, the victim’s son told the press, possibly
explaining why he had thought it would have been all right for his father to
walk around in broad daylight as he had become accustomed to doing in their
town. Speaking to The Washington Post for their February 12 report, the younger Patel had said: “It is a dream
for me [to live here] because I came from a very poor family and I worked so hard
… I’m totally devastated that I might have made a big mistake.”
Even as middle class aspirations and immigrant
desires to live the veritable American dream prove to be no protection against
racism, there is no doubt that the Patels – just as anyone living in the United
States – should not have had to feel that the commonplace act of walking out
one’s door would put one’s life at risk due to the commonplaceness of racism.
Nonetheless, it is specifically because of the assurance felt by a community
that is often emblematically deemed the upwardly mobile model minority that
South Asian Americans can believe themselves to be immune to systemic racism.
Moreover, this extends itself to the notion that the police, rather than being
embedded within such systems, are testament to the protection of those who are
considered ideal subjects in the multicultural civil society of the United
States.
To cut to the chase, Sureshbhai Patel, who speaks
very little English and is an Indian farmer who was visiting this country, was
severely injured by a white policeman because Patel was identified as being
black. Following the recent verdicts in the Eric Garner and Michael Brown
cases, where the white policemen who were responsible for the deaths of these
two black men were tried and found not guilty, I would argue that the incident
involving Patel received as much attention as it did because of the growing
inescapability of questions surrounding abuses of power. As crystallized in the
trending hashtag “Black Lives Matter,” these questions center on how racial
difference is perpetuated by such abuses, both by the police and laws that
protect them over minorities.
While Parker was swiftly charged with third degree
assault, the attack on Patel should not be seen as an outlier to forms of
racialized violence that have been manifesting increasingly through the
involvement of the state, be it in the form of the police or even politicians.
Note the lack of irony in Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s declaration in a
January radio interview with the Family Research Council’s Washington Watch that the United States was under threat of a
Muslim invasion because immigrants of that faith background “want to use our
freedoms to undermine that freedom in the first place.” An Indian American who
converted to Christianity from Hinduism, Jindal’s opinions are those of the
garden variety Republican, but the danger lies in those views emanating from a
politician of minority racial origins. They serve to obfuscate the very real
threat to the lives of Muslim Americans, such as Deah Barakat, Yusor Abu-Salha, and Razan Abu-Salha, the three young relatives who were executed by a white
gunman in Chapel Hill a week after Parker attacked Patel.
In that South Asian American immigrants are of many
faiths, Jindal’s callous statement, made for political gain, diminishes the post-9/11
Islamophobic violence his own community faces, let alone those other Americans
who so happen to be Muslim. Being deliberately oblivious to xenophobia, coupled
with a sense of insulation that can emanate from being considered a model
minority, especially because one is not black, can easily lull one into being
complacent about institutionalized racism. But are you sure “they” know who you
are when you take a walk around your neighborhood?
From India Currents. The longer version appears as "Walking While Brown While Looking Black" on Media Diversified, and a short piece on the subject appears in The Goan as "To Serve and Protect (Someone Else)."
Labels:
Black Lives Matter,
Bobby Jindal,
Deah Barakat,
Eric Garner,
Islamophobia,
Michael Brown,
Police Brutality,
Razan Abu-Salha,
South Asian Americans,
Sureshbhai Patel,
Yusor Abu-Salha
Sunday, August 4, 2013
"The Man Who Wouldn't be King" - INDIA CURRENTS (California - August 2013)
It was May 1992. Los Angeles was
still on fire. Although the tumultuous scene was on our television set in
India, it could not have felt any closer to home. The newscaster offered a
recap of the story that my family had been following intently since April.
Tensions had flared in the aftermath of the verdict in the Rodney King beating
trial. Despite videotaped evidence, the jury had exonerated the policemen
responsible for violently assaulting the black motorist. The acquitted
policemen, as well as the jury, had been all white. In a year, we would be emigrating
to the United States. Los Angeles was our destination. And, like King, my first
name is Rodney.

During the
unrest, when King famously made his televised plea for the people of his city
to “get along,” his statement became the stuff of legendary ridicule. Was it
that the notion of co-existing amicably was so simplistic, or that the
sentiment had come from an ordinary black man with a rap sheet who had been
beaten by the police? What the incident had done was to raise questions about
police brutality and whose rights the keepers of the peace were protecting. For
South Asians, among members of other ethnic communities, similar issues of
racial profiling and civil rights violations rose to a crescendo in the
aftermath of the 9/11 terror attacks. Racial injustice may not be unique to any
one minority group, but it is this very ubiquity of violence that should make
us more mindful. Events in the current moment prove the need for us to voice
our outrage, especially when it comes to those as defenseless as an ordinary, unarmed,
young black boy whose life and rights seem to not matter at all.
Itself a
legacy of the civil rights era, the Hart-Celler Act of 1965 aimed to disprivilege
national origin in changing how immigrants would be allowed entry to the United
States. Even in so doing, the express purpose of this change was to draw in
highly skilled immigrant labor. The contemporary visibility of an upwardly
mobile South Asian, and more specifically Indian, presence in America can be
attributed to the 1965 measure. While 9/11 proved that class privilege was no
deterrent to racial victimization, clearly, not all South Asians who immigrate
to America do so from the technocratic ranks. Provisions made through family
reunification clauses have diversified the community’s class demographics. In
my family’s case, our petition for immigrant entry was made on the basis of my
mother’s East African roots. As Goans of Kenyan heritage, despite the lack of
quotas, it is evident that our case was helped because we were not only South
Asian but also African – we ticked the diversity boxes for two developing
regions.
It is within
these slippages of race and nationality that my personal experiences of being a
dark-skinned resident of the United States have taken shape. The arrest
occurred in January 2009. It had been a few short months after I had become an
American citizen; short months after I participated in an election that brought
to office America’s first black president – a man who, like me, had an East
African history. Just off the bus from work, I was on foot, a few blocks away
from my apartment in West Hollywood when a siren blared behind me. In broad
daylight, I was handcuffed in my own neighborhood and shoved into the back seat
of a deputy sheriff’s car. Citing a violation of the fourth amendment – which
protects people from search and seizure without justifiable cause – I took my
case to the ACLU, stating that I had been a victim of racial profiling. “What
makes you think this
was about race?” the lawyer had asked. “What would make me
think it wasn’t?” I wanted to say, but was stopped from doing so because the
case just was not high profile enough for the organization. Technically, I had
not been arrested because I had not been brought to the station; never mind
that one never forgets what a pair of cuffs feels like.
“Rodney,
huh?” The officer was looking at my California ID while the cold steel
continued to bite into my wrists. Upon finding my UCLA identity card,
establishing that I was an instructor there, the officer’s tone changed
dramatically. “The reason I stopped you,” he said while uncuffing me, “is
because you resemble a man who committed a burglary in this area earlier
today.” Leaving aside the ludicrousness of why someone would be traipsing about
on a brightly lit sunny day just after they had perpetrated a crime, I got
straight to the point and said, “You stopped me because you made an assumption
about my race.” Inadvertently confirming my suspicion, the officer responded,
“It doesn’t matter if you’re a black. All that matters is that you matched the
description I have.”
Was it
because “a black” was in the wrong neighborhood? The irony should be apparent
that in an area thought of as being liberal because of a large gay and lesbian
presence, my complaint to the West Hollywood Sheriff’s Department was met with
the party line that, after an internal investigation, it was ascertained the
officer had acted in accordance with policies and no evidence of racial
profiling could be found. I am sure it was also not racial profiling when a San
Mateo policeman stopped me for questioning in September 2011 claiming that I
resembled a criminal. “I’ll show you what I mean,” the officer said, producing
an image. “You have the same eyebrows,” he explained helpfully. It was probably
also not racial profiling when I was questioned extensively at airport
immigration in September 2001.
In spite of
my name, my dark skin, and my African history, unlike Rodney King, I have the “privilege”
of proving that I am not African American. “Long after your case is closed, you
are going to have to be Rodney

The print version of this India Currents article appears online here, and also on The Aerogram. My thanks to the San Francisco Peninsula Press Club for recognizing this piece with an award for analysis at the 37th Annual Greater Bay Area Journalism Awards on May 31, 2014.
Labels:
9/11,
East Africa,
Hart-Celler Act (1965),
Obama,
Police Brutality,
Racial Profiling,
Rodney King,
Trayvon Martin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)