March 12, 2024 - 11:30am
This week, the Government is expected to unveil its new definition of extremism. Speaking to the Sunday Telegraph, Communities Secretary Michael Gove promised “more specificity on the ideologies, behaviour and groups of concern to support vital counter-radicalisation work”. He rejected suggestions that gender-critical feminists and devout Christians, Muslims, and Jews would fall foul of the new definition.
It is certainly time to replace the existing Prevent definition of extremism as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”. As Conservative MP Miriam Cates tweeted, “What does it even mean to ‘undermine British values’ when there is no consensus – and certainly no legal definition – of what those values are?” But will the revised definition fare any better?
Definitions are like fishing nets. As with fishing nets, there is always the risk that they will catch what they were not intended to catch or not catch what they were intended to catch. To avoid definitional overreach, it is important to be clear who or what a definition of extremism is supposed to net. In a recent statement on extremism, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak rightly highlighted the behavioural component of extremism. Extremists, he seemed to suggest, are people who rely on violence, threats, or intimidation to advance their political agenda.
One of the attractions of this approach is that it focuses on what people do, not on what they believe. Whatever one’s political agenda, an individual will count as an extremist if they use violence, threats, or intimidation to advance it. A person who uses such extreme methods to undermine democracy is an extremist, but so too is a person who uses the same methods to advance a more palatable political agenda.
In the Sunday Telegraph interview, Gove tries to make a distinction between a person’s religion and their political ideology. “It’s only extremism if you translate this into a political ideology that is anti-democratic,” he notes. But the belief that Sharia law should be introduced in the UK is both religious and ideological; so-called Islamists have this belief, but so do many mainstream Muslims who wouldn’t dream of resorting to violence to change British law.
It therefore won’t be sufficient to say that Muslims who believe that democracy is un-Islamic aren’t extremists because their belief is a question of religion rather than political ideology. And if private beliefs are to be “cherished”, as Gove claims, what about the private beliefs of sceptics about democracy? Such sceptics include academics who write books with titles such as Against Democracy and argue for alternative systems of government. Are they extremists too?
These potentially embarrassing questions for the new definition can be sidestepped by adopting a non-ideological definition of extremism. The point is not that extremism isn’t partly a matter of ideology, but that ideological extremism is not what governments should be trying to police. As Ayaan Hirsi Ali has argued, the difference between a mainstream Muslim and an Islamist is not primarily ideological. It is their willingness to resort to violence to impose their political beliefs on others.
If behaviour rather than ideology is the key to extremism, then the challenge is to be more specific about the kinds of behaviour that are “extremist”. One example of intimidation might be protests at the home addresses of MPs. A recent Home Office policing protocol rules that such protests “should generally be considered intimidatory”, and it is hard to argue with this. In the climate of fear created by the relatively recent murder of two MPs, demonstrating outside a politician’s home is highly intimidatory and should be banned, despite protestations to the contrary from groups such as Amnesty International.
For practical purposes, groups that resort to political intimidation or threaten minorities are made up of extremists and should not be funded by the Government or other public bodies. The new definition of extremism should be applauded if it has this consequence, but care needs to be taken that the definitional fishing net doesn’t catch too many of the wrong fish, as well as the right ones.
Quassim Cassam is Professor of Philosophy at Warwick University. His latest book is Extremism: A Philosophical Analysis.
QCassam
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI’d like to see evidence supporting the notion that yoga asanas have 5000 year old roots.
The usual source given for evidence of yoga asanas are Patanjalis suttras, and the dates given for these vary between 500 BC and 300AD. Well respected yoga teacher, scholar and Scotsman Brian Cooper gives a convincing argument that the date is much later and that the sutras were a reaction against and appropriation of Theravada Buddhism which for a while was competing effectively with older Vedic/Hindu traditions. And when you compare the two, the similarities are striking.
Yet in the sutras there is nothing about a series of exercises bringing forth spiritual development. This conflation is a modern confection.
If we want to find the history of what we consider todays’ yoga (postures) we need look back no further than a few generations. Mark Singleton wrote an excellent book on the topic called “The yoga body” where it becomes clear that the series of exercises we know today owes more to Swedish Ling Gymnastics and the British Army training manual than to anything Indian or spiritual.
Many schools of modern yoga asanas can be traced to one teacher – Tirumalai Krishnamacharya who lived 1888 – 1989. In the 1930s he taught exercise classes in Mysore to prepubescent Brahmin boys. As one of his famous students BKS Iyengar said “If there was a spiritual dimension to the practice, he didn’t tell us at the time.” And then, when Americans on the hippy trail turned up in Mysore in the 1960s, another of Krishnamacharyas’ students, K. Pattabhi Jois was only too happy to teach them the series he came up with in exchange for money. And those Americans being American, turned this series of poses into a business.
So, given we know all this harping on about cultural appropriation is nonsense, what are the motivations? One thing I have noticed is how many prominent academics and politicians of Indian heritage or actually Indian, are also of high caste. Brahmin. A true position of privilege in Indian society. Given that it is now essential to a persons career that they have some degree of victim status, it would be necessary for those who occupy the highest caste to make some claim, indeed any claim of oppression to preserve their status that according to current fashion should be in jeopardy. The low hanging fruit would be being victims of Colonialism, Whiteness, racism etc…It is essential to anyone now who wishes to have any position of power, authority or status to be able to outsource the cause of their problems, failings, shortcomings and challenges to (ideally) white Europeans of the past present and future.
Ironic, as both Patanaji and Theravada Buddhism teach that the cause of our troubles are not from without but from within.
“One thing I have noticed is how many prominent academics and politicians of Indian heritage or actually Indian, are also of high caste. Brahmin. ”
And here we go again.
You might notice that the majority of Indian freedom fighters were upper caste brahmins.
Pretty much all of them fought for freedom for ALL castes, men and women (in stark contrast to many British suffragettes).
And were happy to see an independent India outlaw caste based discrimination (something the British empire failed to do, incidentally) and have the constitution written by BR Ambedkar. Who was not exactly an upper caste brahmin, incidentally.
And as for Brahmins dominating a higher than expected proportion of academic jobs in India – that’s DESPITE significant reservations for so called lower castes. The Brahmins are there on merit, despite discriminatory quotas, just like Jews in America. You have a problem with one, you should have a problem with the other.
The reason I find this “brahmins” trope offensive is because its spreaders care zilch for the poor and less privileged in India. It’s designed to malign Hinduism overall.
Here is a final fun question. Most of the Hindus remaining in Pakistan and Bangladesh are “lower caste”. Where do you think they are oppressed more (by a clear margin), “brahmin” India or the non brahminical muslim majority countries?
So India is a utopian meritocracy, and the cream just rises naturally to the top? And this could only happen once the British left?
Right you are.
So, did you have any evidence to support the notion of yoga asanas being a 5000 year old Indian spiritual practice?
Or any other reason to support the faux outrage to the faux cultural appropriation of a faux cultural phenomenon?
Doesn’t matter whether Yoga is 5000 years old or 200.
Cricket is 100 years old, but nobody pretends or claims that it was invented in India.
Similarly, it’s fairly sensible to accept that the basic concept of Yoga originated in India. That’s not the same as claiming someone in Britain doing yoga (or eating an anglicised “Indian” dish) is doing “cultural appropriation”. That rubbish is down to western leftist elites, nobody believes that in India.
“India is a utopian meritocracy, and the cream just rises naturally to the top?”
That’s not what I said, kindly don’t put words in my mouth. Of course, as in Britain, born to relatively well off parents is an advantage, but you still have to work hard to get ahead.
But – the Indian higher education system, though not utopian, is a lot more merit based than the US, because it’s less subjective and more based on anonymous examination.
And yes, despite that brahmins have it difficult by design in the system. Just like “affirmative action” in the West makes it more difficult for Whites (and Asians).
It is becoming evident that other than constantly changing the subject or dragging in irrelevant topics you’ve little to offer this exchange.
It is becoming evident that other than constantly changing the subject or dragging in irrelevant topics you’ve little to offer this exchange.
Doesn’t matter whether Yoga is 5000 years old or 200.
Cricket is 100 years old, but nobody pretends or claims that it was invented in India.
Similarly, it’s fairly sensible to accept that the basic concept of Yoga originated in India. That’s not the same as claiming someone in Britain doing yoga (or eating an anglicised “Indian” dish) is doing “cultural appropriation”. That rubbish is down to western leftist elites, nobody believes that in India.
“India is a utopian meritocracy, and the cream just rises naturally to the top?”
That’s not what I said, kindly don’t put words in my mouth. Of course, as in Britain, born to relatively well off parents is an advantage, but you still have to work hard to get ahead.
But – the Indian higher education system, though not utopian, is a lot more merit based than the US, because it’s less subjective and more based on anonymous examination.
And yes, despite that brahmins have it difficult by design in the system. Just like “affirmative action” in the West makes it more difficult for Whites (and Asians).
So India is a utopian meritocracy, and the cream just rises naturally to the top? And this could only happen once the British left?
Right you are.
So, did you have any evidence to support the notion of yoga asanas being a 5000 year old Indian spiritual practice?
Or any other reason to support the faux outrage to the faux cultural appropriation of a faux cultural phenomenon?
“One thing I have noticed is how many prominent academics and politicians of Indian heritage or actually Indian, are also of high caste. Brahmin. ”
And here we go again.
You might notice that the majority of Indian freedom fighters were upper caste brahmins.
Pretty much all of them fought for freedom for ALL castes, men and women (in stark contrast to many British suffragettes).
And were happy to see an independent India outlaw caste based discrimination (something the British empire failed to do, incidentally) and have the constitution written by BR Ambedkar. Who was not exactly an upper caste brahmin, incidentally.
And as for Brahmins dominating a higher than expected proportion of academic jobs in India – that’s DESPITE significant reservations for so called lower castes. The Brahmins are there on merit, despite discriminatory quotas, just like Jews in America. You have a problem with one, you should have a problem with the other.
The reason I find this “brahmins” trope offensive is because its spreaders care zilch for the poor and less privileged in India. It’s designed to malign Hinduism overall.
Here is a final fun question. Most of the Hindus remaining in Pakistan and Bangladesh are “lower caste”. Where do you think they are oppressed more (by a clear margin), “brahmin” India or the non brahminical muslim majority countries?
I’d like to see evidence supporting the notion that yoga asanas have 5000 year old roots.
The usual source given for evidence of yoga asanas are Patanjalis suttras, and the dates given for these vary between 500 BC and 300AD. Well respected yoga teacher, scholar and Scotsman Brian Cooper gives a convincing argument that the date is much later and that the sutras were a reaction against and appropriation of Theravada Buddhism which for a while was competing effectively with older Vedic/Hindu traditions. And when you compare the two, the similarities are striking.
Yet in the sutras there is nothing about a series of exercises bringing forth spiritual development. This conflation is a modern confection.
If we want to find the history of what we consider todays’ yoga (postures) we need look back no further than a few generations. Mark Singleton wrote an excellent book on the topic called “The yoga body” where it becomes clear that the series of exercises we know today owes more to Swedish Ling Gymnastics and the British Army training manual than to anything Indian or spiritual.
Many schools of modern yoga asanas can be traced to one teacher – Tirumalai Krishnamacharya who lived 1888 – 1989. In the 1930s he taught exercise classes in Mysore to prepubescent Brahmin boys. As one of his famous students BKS Iyengar said “If there was a spiritual dimension to the practice, he didn’t tell us at the time.” And then, when Americans on the hippy trail turned up in Mysore in the 1960s, another of Krishnamacharyas’ students, K. Pattabhi Jois was only too happy to teach them the series he came up with in exchange for money. And those Americans being American, turned this series of poses into a business.
So, given we know all this harping on about cultural appropriation is nonsense, what are the motivations? One thing I have noticed is how many prominent academics and politicians of Indian heritage or actually Indian, are also of high caste. Brahmin. A true position of privilege in Indian society. Given that it is now essential to a persons career that they have some degree of victim status, it would be necessary for those who occupy the highest caste to make some claim, indeed any claim of oppression to preserve their status that according to current fashion should be in jeopardy. The low hanging fruit would be being victims of Colonialism, Whiteness, racism etc…It is essential to anyone now who wishes to have any position of power, authority or status to be able to outsource the cause of their problems, failings, shortcomings and challenges to (ideally) white Europeans of the past present and future.
Ironic, as both Patanaji and Theravada Buddhism teach that the cause of our troubles are not from without but from within.
I think that the Indians should not be allowed to culturally appropriate cricket.
They have divorced the game from its ancient roots in the English countryside. Do the players after a village repair to a pub after? Are there old maid cycling to evensong?
Ha. I came here to write exactly that.
If you have a problem with that, discuss that with the Guardian. Growing up in India, I haven’t heard a single Indian mention “cultural appropriation” or care two hoots if some suburban housewife in Kansas does Yoga.
That being said, nobody in India would deny that Britain invented cricket, or certain Asian countries invented sushi or Kung Fu. Similarly, the only limited objective for certain government bodies (entrusted with protecting Indian heritage) would be to ensure that Yoga is attached to the Indian brand.
Beyond that, do whatever absurdity with Indian stuff, food, etc. Good for you. Indians enjoy cricket, you have fun with weird exercises and chicken tikka masala. It’s a win win for all.
We British miserably failed to export irony…
Ha.
Actually, at least among the educated parts of India, British humour is arguably a more popular export than even cricket (both print, and pre-woke BBC, and with good reason).
Even now I believe Wodehouse and Pratchett (at least amongst those who have come across the latter) are the most beloved authors, Wodehouse might have more fans today over there than in the country of his origin.
Name drop; I teach at Wodehouse’s alma mater.
Nice!
Nice!
Tom Sharpe, Flashman… Yup British humor rocks !!
Name drop; I teach at Wodehouse’s alma mater.
Tom Sharpe, Flashman… Yup British humor rocks !!
Ha.
Actually, at least among the educated parts of India, British humour is arguably a more popular export than even cricket (both print, and pre-woke BBC, and with good reason).
Even now I believe Wodehouse and Pratchett (at least amongst those who have come across the latter) are the most beloved authors, Wodehouse might have more fans today over there than in the country of his origin.
Well, the classic way of addressing this is that cricket is an Indian game invented in England.
We would have gained much less from cricket had it not reached the former colonies and that often, the colonial nations become better at it than we are.
Mind, while being beaten by the Aussies was painful, being beaten by the magnificent Windies teams of the eighties was a delight.
Holds true for everything doesn’t it?
For instance I would argue the Guardian pieces on “cultural appropriation” misses the crucial point – something like Yoga or Indian food or dress being picked up by Westerners enriches the original.
Holds true for everything doesn’t it?
For instance I would argue the Guardian pieces on “cultural appropriation” misses the crucial point – something like Yoga or Indian food or dress being picked up by Westerners enriches the original.
My overall reaction of surprise to the whole article is that I can’t really put my fingers on with my opinion. Looking at the comments I’ve found this part the most insightful:
“Similarly, the only limited objective for certain government bodies (entrusted with protecting Indian heritage) would be to ensure that Yoga is attached to the Indian brand.”
I really hope that the aims of this article wasn’t really to tie Yoga to an “Indian Brand”. It’s ridiculous for governments to try to shape culture and cultural aspects because they’re mostly a destroyer of cultures (think e.g. how many dialects were destroyed by imposing a “national language” that everyone is obliged to learn in a school).
Indeed, the article insists on the idea of “cultural appropriation”. Culture is and always has been exchangeable, This direction leads to nowhere.
What I do think that bases the criticism is that the spirit of West is money, authoritarianism, imperialism. I don’t know much about the yoga’s roots, but it’s known that in some indigenous cultures around the world a man can be friend of a stone or a tree. You can’t “yoga” (or whatever practice) to certain elements if you praise completely different elements.
We British miserably failed to export irony…
Well, the classic way of addressing this is that cricket is an Indian game invented in England.
We would have gained much less from cricket had it not reached the former colonies and that often, the colonial nations become better at it than we are.
Mind, while being beaten by the Aussies was painful, being beaten by the magnificent Windies teams of the eighties was a delight.
My overall reaction of surprise to the whole article is that I can’t really put my fingers on with my opinion. Looking at the comments I’ve found this part the most insightful:
“Similarly, the only limited objective for certain government bodies (entrusted with protecting Indian heritage) would be to ensure that Yoga is attached to the Indian brand.”
I really hope that the aims of this article wasn’t really to tie Yoga to an “Indian Brand”. It’s ridiculous for governments to try to shape culture and cultural aspects because they’re mostly a destroyer of cultures (think e.g. how many dialects were destroyed by imposing a “national language” that everyone is obliged to learn in a school).
Indeed, the article insists on the idea of “cultural appropriation”. Culture is and always has been exchangeable, This direction leads to nowhere.
What I do think that bases the criticism is that the spirit of West is money, authoritarianism, imperialism. I don’t know much about the yoga’s roots, but it’s known that in some indigenous cultures around the world a man can be friend of a stone or a tree. You can’t “yoga” (or whatever practice) to certain elements if you praise completely different elements.
nor motor cars, plane, television, the English language….but what about curry
And do the Indians, or anyone else for that matter, fully appreciate the golden celebration of cricket, and mortality, and the glory of the brass, in Roy Harpers wonderful song, ‘When an old cricketer leaves the crease’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy-WU7RPxEw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_an_Old_Cricketer_Leaves_the_Crease
When an old cricketer leaves the crease
You never know whether he’s gone
If sometimes you’re catching a fleeting glimpse
Of a twelfth man at silly mid-on
And it could be Geoff and it could be John
With a new-ball sting in his tail
And it could be me and it could be thee
And it could be the sting in the ale
The sting in the ale
I always felt that the Windies understood the game in a remarkable way and, at their peak, were a wonder.
I always felt that the Windies understood the game in a remarkable way and, at their peak, were a wonder.
Hockey too.
Obviously, I write in jest and I’m pleased this is appreciated but the idea of cultural appropriation I think is one of the most pernicious ideas I have ever encountered,
The soft version which says that when we use something developed in another place we should acknowledge that but, the fact that we use something created elsewhere by people long ago is the greatest complement we can give them. By so many people, freely choosing to do yoga honours those who developed it.
The harder version which suggests we should not use these ideas or cough up a bit of cash for their descendants is a way of creating barriers between people. It’s very nasty.
My club used to play against a bunch of Tamils from Sri Lanka. They were bloody good sports, and absolutely hilarious in the pub afterwards, where they all drank g&t’s.
Ha. I came here to write exactly that.
If you have a problem with that, discuss that with the Guardian. Growing up in India, I haven’t heard a single Indian mention “cultural appropriation” or care two hoots if some suburban housewife in Kansas does Yoga.
That being said, nobody in India would deny that Britain invented cricket, or certain Asian countries invented sushi or Kung Fu. Similarly, the only limited objective for certain government bodies (entrusted with protecting Indian heritage) would be to ensure that Yoga is attached to the Indian brand.
Beyond that, do whatever absurdity with Indian stuff, food, etc. Good for you. Indians enjoy cricket, you have fun with weird exercises and chicken tikka masala. It’s a win win for all.
nor motor cars, plane, television, the English language….but what about curry
And do the Indians, or anyone else for that matter, fully appreciate the golden celebration of cricket, and mortality, and the glory of the brass, in Roy Harpers wonderful song, ‘When an old cricketer leaves the crease’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy-WU7RPxEw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_an_Old_Cricketer_Leaves_the_Crease
When an old cricketer leaves the crease
You never know whether he’s gone
If sometimes you’re catching a fleeting glimpse
Of a twelfth man at silly mid-on
And it could be Geoff and it could be John
With a new-ball sting in his tail
And it could be me and it could be thee
And it could be the sting in the ale
The sting in the ale
Hockey too.
Obviously, I write in jest and I’m pleased this is appreciated but the idea of cultural appropriation I think is one of the most pernicious ideas I have ever encountered,
The soft version which says that when we use something developed in another place we should acknowledge that but, the fact that we use something created elsewhere by people long ago is the greatest complement we can give them. By so many people, freely choosing to do yoga honours those who developed it.
The harder version which suggests we should not use these ideas or cough up a bit of cash for their descendants is a way of creating barriers between people. It’s very nasty.
My club used to play against a bunch of Tamils from Sri Lanka. They were bloody good sports, and absolutely hilarious in the pub afterwards, where they all drank g&t’s.
I think that the Indians should not be allowed to culturally appropriate cricket.
They have divorced the game from its ancient roots in the English countryside. Do the players after a village repair to a pub after? Are there old maid cycling to evensong?
The only way to deal with issues of this sort is to ignore them. They are just part of the unending, ever-changing self-flagellation practiced by the Liberal left.
If they would stick to flagellating themselves it wouldn’t be a problem.
If they would stick to flagellating themselves it wouldn’t be a problem.
The only way to deal with issues of this sort is to ignore them. They are just part of the unending, ever-changing self-flagellation practiced by the Liberal left.
I saw the headline, realised it was about yoga being “cultural appropriation”, thought “what utter claptrap”, and before clicking the link made a bet with myself that the Guardian would be mentioned within a few sentences. I’m not generally good at predictions, but this was one I could have bet my house on.
I saw the headline, realised it was about yoga being “cultural appropriation”, thought “what utter claptrap”, and before clicking the link made a bet with myself that the Guardian would be mentioned within a few sentences. I’m not generally good at predictions, but this was one I could have bet my house on.
Goldberg is correct. The Indian state has been pushing various yoga narratives that are ahistorical. Just go to the MEA/AYUSH site or search ‘history and development of yoga’. It’s all nonsense and even subtely promotes an ‘out of India theory’ that implicitly claims that vedic sanskrit speaking people were the first humans who then colonized the entire world and that through yoga’s global popularity, one day India will return to this position as the ‘world’s guru’ and rightful ruler. Most people alive in India today wouldn’t be able to name a relative beyond their great grandparent who did ‘yoga’. No one did ‘yoga’ up until 100 years or so ago. The only reason it’s popular in India among the middle class is because of the pizza effect, when celebrities in Hollywood made it so. The hatha yogis, the ascetic warrior guilds who not only created the medieval haṭha yoga texts such as the haṭhayogapradīpikā, etc. (around 15th century CE) otherwise spent their time seasonally pillaging the trade/pilgrimage routes, money lending, arms dealing, slave trading, and running the espionage industry, and operating as mercenary guerillas, etc. These are the guys whom all the lululemon wearing yoginis on high street think are magical and mystical. sure, they are exotic. but the original word ‘yoga’ is funny. it’s attested back in the ṛgveda (1200 BCE-ish). It refers to the early ṛgvedic culture which is often portrayed as vegetarian and agrarian. but this is total BS. any time someone says that the people of the ṛgveda were peaceable and just ‘yolked oxen to carts for farming’ are either lying (like a good marxist) or they are dumb. maybe it’s the same thing? ‘yoga’, in it’s most earliest formulations meant ‘action’ of a martial kind. in fact, it meant a ‘period of time for ‘action” which involved destroying enemies, stealing their property (cows and women), and returning victorious or dying a hero’s death on the battlefield. the favourite sound of these people who gave us the word ‘yoga’ was not the sound of a yoga mat being rolled out and chanting ‘om’, but rather the sound of flies buzzing around entrails and the splash of cow fat onto the hot coals…. the only people trying to kick up a stink about yoga’s cultural appropriation should go to india and look at how the mārga (orthodoxy/establishment) appropriates from the deśi (local, marginalised). Take for eg, the ‘Bollywood’ music and dancing. This was extracted from very local traditions and commodified. The same can be said of yoga. No govt other than India seeks to profit more from misrepresenting yoga as mysterious and mystical and timeless. Cultural appropriation is dumb term. And that’s coming from an anthropologist. What do humans do apart from see something or technology or whatever and decide it’s good enough to take on. Even Modi said yoga is a India’s gift to the world…sounds like, however, that those banging the cultural appropriation drum are ‘Indian givers’…
Goldberg is correct. The Indian state has been pushing various yoga narratives that are ahistorical. Just go to the MEA/AYUSH site or search ‘history and development of yoga’. It’s all nonsense and even subtely promotes an ‘out of India theory’ that implicitly claims that vedic sanskrit speaking people were the first humans who then colonized the entire world and that through yoga’s global popularity, one day India will return to this position as the ‘world’s guru’ and rightful ruler. Most people alive in India today wouldn’t be able to name a relative beyond their great grandparent who did ‘yoga’. No one did ‘yoga’ up until 100 years or so ago. The only reason it’s popular in India among the middle class is because of the pizza effect, when celebrities in Hollywood made it so. The hatha yogis, the ascetic warrior guilds who not only created the medieval haṭha yoga texts such as the haṭhayogapradīpikā, etc. (around 15th century CE) otherwise spent their time seasonally pillaging the trade/pilgrimage routes, money lending, arms dealing, slave trading, and running the espionage industry, and operating as mercenary guerillas, etc. These are the guys whom all the lululemon wearing yoginis on high street think are magical and mystical. sure, they are exotic. but the original word ‘yoga’ is funny. it’s attested back in the ṛgveda (1200 BCE-ish). It refers to the early ṛgvedic culture which is often portrayed as vegetarian and agrarian. but this is total BS. any time someone says that the people of the ṛgveda were peaceable and just ‘yolked oxen to carts for farming’ are either lying (like a good marxist) or they are dumb. maybe it’s the same thing? ‘yoga’, in it’s most earliest formulations meant ‘action’ of a martial kind. in fact, it meant a ‘period of time for ‘action” which involved destroying enemies, stealing their property (cows and women), and returning victorious or dying a hero’s death on the battlefield. the favourite sound of these people who gave us the word ‘yoga’ was not the sound of a yoga mat being rolled out and chanting ‘om’, but rather the sound of flies buzzing around entrails and the splash of cow fat onto the hot coals…. the only people trying to kick up a stink about yoga’s cultural appropriation should go to india and look at how the mārga (orthodoxy/establishment) appropriates from the deśi (local, marginalised). Take for eg, the ‘Bollywood’ music and dancing. This was extracted from very local traditions and commodified. The same can be said of yoga. No govt other than India seeks to profit more from misrepresenting yoga as mysterious and mystical and timeless. Cultural appropriation is dumb term. And that’s coming from an anthropologist. What do humans do apart from see something or technology or whatever and decide it’s good enough to take on. Even Modi said yoga is a India’s gift to the world…sounds like, however, that those banging the cultural appropriation drum are ‘Indian givers’…
Isn’t Jacob Zuma in a three-piece suit cultural appreciation?
Even the term “cultural appropriation” is cultural appropriation…
No, he is still just a corrupt p***k
Even the term “cultural appropriation” is cultural appropriation…
No, he is still just a corrupt p***k
Isn’t Jacob Zuma in a three-piece suit cultural appreciation?
“Stretching. Yoga is stretching. Everything else is illusion.” Said the Ancient Sage.
“Stretching. Yoga is stretching. Everything else is illusion.” Said the Ancient Sage.
I often wonder what those who decry the cultural appropriation of a practice (such as yoga) want us to do if we were accept their argument. Stop practising yoga? Make it illegal for all non-Indians to practise it? How would that work?
I often wonder what those who decry the cultural appropriation of a practice (such as yoga) want us to do if we were accept their argument. Stop practising yoga? Make it illegal for all non-Indians to practise it? How would that work?
“the biggest reason why the debate about yoga and cultural appropriation won’t die: because bringing it up is too valuable a promotional tool to let it go entirely.”
You nailed it. And self-referentially, as well. The vast majority of all essays featuring angst in any form are invariably amplifying angst for profit.
By the way, without cultural appropriation we’d all still be hunter gatherers living lives that were nasty, brutish and short.
“the biggest reason why the debate about yoga and cultural appropriation won’t die: because bringing it up is too valuable a promotional tool to let it go entirely.”
You nailed it. And self-referentially, as well. The vast majority of all essays featuring angst in any form are invariably amplifying angst for profit.
By the way, without cultural appropriation we’d all still be hunter gatherers living lives that were nasty, brutish and short.
I did yoga at work several times a week for a few years, and the stretching and balancing did make a big difference to the flexibility of my fifties body. But I still hated it, and especially the spiritual rubbish. The teacher was too embarrassed about that guff to make our class of middle aged office workers do it.
But I love seeing how the woke revolution eats it’s own over its icons like yoga. There’s a great article in Unherd from earlier this year when a painfully woke yoga school just wasn’t woke enough, and got dumped on for it:
https://unherd.com/2022/05/the-cruel-world-of-yoga/
I did yoga at work several times a week for a few years, and the stretching and balancing did make a big difference to the flexibility of my fifties body. But I still hated it, and especially the spiritual rubbish. The teacher was too embarrassed about that guff to make our class of middle aged office workers do it.
But I love seeing how the woke revolution eats it’s own over its icons like yoga. There’s a great article in Unherd from earlier this year when a painfully woke yoga school just wasn’t woke enough, and got dumped on for it:
https://unherd.com/2022/05/the-cruel-world-of-yoga/
As I’ve done yoga (outside India) since the 70s, the horse has well and truly bolted. It’s a marvellous , healthy form of exercise and meditation vehicle that anyone can practice, for free. It’s been utilised and developed by millions, including Josef Pilates virtually a century ago. Its postures are adapted and used casually in just about every gym routine. It’s also a celebration of the cultural marvels of India in the same way as its humble but wonderful food. To claim sovereignty over it is as daft as calling straightened afro hair or Indians playing cricket “cultural appropriation”. The world is a better and more interesting place because of the absorption of the good things from other cultures. Anyway, much of how the world lives today could be labelled “cultural appropriation” of the British.
As I’ve done yoga (outside India) since the 70s, the horse has well and truly bolted. It’s a marvellous , healthy form of exercise and meditation vehicle that anyone can practice, for free. It’s been utilised and developed by millions, including Josef Pilates virtually a century ago. Its postures are adapted and used casually in just about every gym routine. It’s also a celebration of the cultural marvels of India in the same way as its humble but wonderful food. To claim sovereignty over it is as daft as calling straightened afro hair or Indians playing cricket “cultural appropriation”. The world is a better and more interesting place because of the absorption of the good things from other cultures. Anyway, much of how the world lives today could be labelled “cultural appropriation” of the British.
1) A non-issue emerges.
2) First newspaper generates clickbait from non-issue 1.
3) Second paper generates clickbait from non-issue 2.
4) Commenter, despite himself reacts to non-issues.
1) A non-issue emerges.
2) First newspaper generates clickbait from non-issue 1.
3) Second paper generates clickbait from non-issue 2.
4) Commenter, despite himself reacts to non-issues.
“Gilani is also especially peeved about t-shirts bearing the ubiquitous Om symbol and tattoos featuring Hindu gods. “It’s cultural appropriation and it’s offensive.””
I simply must get myself a t-shirt bearing the ubiquitous Om symbol, and several humungous tattoos of Hindu gods.
“Gilani is also especially peeved about t-shirts bearing the ubiquitous Om symbol and tattoos featuring Hindu gods. “It’s cultural appropriation and it’s offensive.””
I simply must get myself a t-shirt bearing the ubiquitous Om symbol, and several humungous tattoos of Hindu gods.
What about cricket? Is it not an English game?
An English game cricket is … hmmm ,,, yes.
An English game cricket is … hmmm ,,, yes.
What about cricket? Is it not an English game?
Hmmm… must the sub-continent abandon its love of cricket then?
Later edit:
Sorry I see that someone’s already said this, but there’s no ‘delete’ option…
Hmmm… must the sub-continent abandon its love of cricket then?
Later edit:
Sorry I see that someone’s already said this, but there’s no ‘delete’ option…
There just HAS to be a market for deliberately provocatively unwoke yoga. I would sign up like a shot.
There just HAS to be a market for deliberately provocatively unwoke yoga. I would sign up like a shot.
Ok, well flush toilets are a Western invention, so how about we stop doing yoga if Indians stop using flush toilets. I wonder which side will give in first.
Ok, well flush toilets are a Western invention, so how about we stop doing yoga if Indians stop using flush toilets. I wonder which side will give in first.
The author brings an informed, insider’s perspective, an appropriate one (ha ha). But why the clickbait headline–though perhaps it worked on me–lending energy to more outrage vs. outrage squabbling in a dispute that most people, across a broad viewpoint spectrum, would dismiss as silly in the unlikely event they knew such a dispute existed?
I know it’s not a complete solution, but shouldn’t part of the response to wokeism or what might be called ultra-hyper-postmodernism be to ignore it more often?
Again, I think Rosenfield’s more measured, inside-the-studio perspective elevates this article above flailing huff and puffery, especially in her final sentences:
A “refusal to dwell on wickedness” or to “obsess over it” or “let it spoil everything […] doesn’t just work as a means of staying sane and centered while the latest outrage cycle churns–but for that, it works very well indeed”.
Om mani padme hum to that.
The author brings an informed, insider’s perspective, an appropriate one (ha ha). But why the clickbait headline–though perhaps it worked on me–lending energy to more outrage vs. outrage squabbling in a dispute that most people, across a broad viewpoint spectrum, would dismiss as silly in the unlikely event they knew such a dispute existed?
I know it’s not a complete solution, but shouldn’t part of the response to wokeism or what might be called ultra-hyper-postmodernism be to ignore it more often?
Again, I think Rosenfield’s more measured, inside-the-studio perspective elevates this article above flailing huff and puffery, especially in her final sentences:
A “refusal to dwell on wickedness” or to “obsess over it” or “let it spoil everything […] doesn’t just work as a means of staying sane and centered while the latest outrage cycle churns–but for that, it works very well indeed”.
Om mani padme hum to that.
An oldie, but goodie satirization of this phenomenon:
Goodness Gracious Me – Superman is Indian….!!!
An oldie, but goodie satirization of this phenomenon:
Goodness Gracious Me – Superman is Indian….!!!
The whole notion of cultural appropriation is a parody of the stupidity of anybody trying to peddle identity politics and its worth to an educated and mature population. ” Keeping everybody in their lane” is the antithesis of the collorabitive effort to produce globally-minded citizens who will contribute to making this world a better and more accommodating place to which we can all belong. The irony is the identity politics gurus are more closely aligned to the far right than they ever realise, and defining everything through the lens of colour and gender merely preserves the inherent inequality of class and the “identities’ they claim to represent. Progressive? Absolutely not. Regressive? Absolutely so.
The whole notion of cultural appropriation is a parody of the stupidity of anybody trying to peddle identity politics and its worth to an educated and mature population. ” Keeping everybody in their lane” is the antithesis of the collorabitive effort to produce globally-minded citizens who will contribute to making this world a better and more accommodating place to which we can all belong. The irony is the identity politics gurus are more closely aligned to the far right than they ever realise, and defining everything through the lens of colour and gender merely preserves the inherent inequality of class and the “identities’ they claim to represent. Progressive? Absolutely not. Regressive? Absolutely so.
I’m quite fond of the “yoga is evil cultural appropriation when white people do it” trope, because it gives me an excuse to not do yoga, when in reality it’s because I’m lazy and not very bendy.
Though in reality you’re right, the cry of cultural appropriation is merely the first stage of a massive shill.
I’m quite fond of the “yoga is evil cultural appropriation when white people do it” trope, because it gives me an excuse to not do yoga, when in reality it’s because I’m lazy and not very bendy.
Though in reality you’re right, the cry of cultural appropriation is merely the first stage of a massive shill.
I have never ever ever ever ever ever come across anyone who thinks that westerners can’t practice yoga. Maybe I should have a word with the 17 yoga studios in my local area. You know, give them a heads up.
I have never ever ever ever ever ever come across anyone who thinks that westerners can’t practice yoga. Maybe I should have a word with the 17 yoga studios in my local area. You know, give them a heads up.
cheramy
I am afraid ! Nobody is speaking here about the different yoga targets : wellfare, health, sexual performances or.. cancer treatment ! What about Qi Gong ? On the other hand, nobody can escape to the international share of knowledge in CAM (complementary and alternative medicines). Their standards have to be written in ISO for a better usage by every one in the world. Have you already see a standard on Cricket or in Football ?
cheramy
I am afraid ! Nobody is speaking here about the different yoga targets : wellfare, health, sexual performances or.. cancer treatment ! What about Qi Gong ? On the other hand, nobody can escape to the international share of knowledge in CAM (complementary and alternative medicines). Their standards have to be written in ISO for a better usage by every one in the world. Have you already see a standard on Cricket or in Football ?