In the shadow of the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge, Fontbonne Hall Academy in Brooklyn has not been hit by the forces of cultural change quite as bluntly as so many other private schools, which have spent the past few years embracing increasingly progressive values. Founded in 1937 by the Congregation of the Sisters of St. Joseph, an order devoted to the goal of fostering “love, unity and reconciliation,” the girls’ school professes a commitment to “restorative justice.” But when it had the opportunity to put that principle into practice last week, it chose a less forgiving path.

Responding to the deaths of police officers, Wilbert Mora and Jason Rivera, who were killed in the line of duty in Harlem last month, Fontbonne instituted a “dress down” day, which gave students a reprieve from uniforms — and the option to wear blue in commemoration — as they raised money for the families of the men who were shot. Resisting the effort, a young teacher named Laura Lynne Duffy announced on Twitter that she would be “intentionally dressing up,” adding the hashtags “BLM” and “Abolition” to her post. The next day, the school announced that it was letting her go after “a thorough investigation.”

In private discussions among young alumnae, some took the view that the school had been unduly punitive. But the Facebook page for the Sisters of St. Joseph featured dozens of comments supportive of the school’s decision, with certain posters calling Duffy “hateful,” a “monster” and someone who “should never be allowed to teach ANYWHERE again.” (Neither Duffy nor the various teachers and administrators at Fontbonne responded to repeated requests to talk about what happened.)

The dismissal, one among several, suggests that we may have entered a new phase of intolerance. In the current environment, police unions and their sympathizers in and out of the tabloid press have assumed the role of left-wing ideologues, wielding their power to silence views that challenge a prevailing orthodoxy at a time when crime has been challenging and the police feel as if they are operating amid greater dangers.

As it happened, Duffy was not the only Brooklyn teacher to be fired as a result of critical comments made about the police. Days earlier, Chris Flanigan, who had been working at Coney Island Prep for just a few weeks, was let go after posting an image to his personal Instagram account of a throng of police officers outside the funeral for Rivera with the text: “5/30/20: NYPD SUV drives into a crowd of protesters. Ideal conditions for reciprocity.”

Flanigan was referring to a situation in which a police department vehicle accelerated toward a barricade, knocking people down behind it, in Brooklyn at a demonstration around George Floyd’s murder. Some people interpreted his post as a call for retribution, which makes it harder to defend. Remarking on the teacher’s firing in a statement, Leslie-Bernard Joseph, CEO of Coney Island Prep, a charter school where the majority of students are Black and Latino, said that as public servants, teachers and staff must hold themselves to a “higher standard” and that the school did not “condone or promote violence of any sort.”

But Flanigan claimed he did not condone violence either, that he respected “uniform service” and that he had been trying to suggest — however incendiary his language seemed — that the crowd formation had put the police officers in a vulnerable position. He expressed “deep regret” for his comments and said that he had “incredible respect for Coney Island Prep and the community.” But his rash words now appeared to make him irredeemable.

Had the ideas he registered on Instagram never made their way to a broader audience, the threats and harassment that he and the school ultimately endured might not have come to pass. Flanigan, who had only 400 Instagram followers at the time, put the post up at midnight on a Friday. By 10 the next morning, he told me, after noticing that a few people had taken issue with his sentiment, he removed it. On Saturday night, however, Flanigan received a call from The New York Post, which had got hold of the posting and planned to run an article about it. It went up several hours later, and early Sunday morning, Flanigan alerted his employers.

Although the arts might seem more open to controversial positions, a young actress named Jacqueline Guzman found herself cast aside after she vented and cursed about street closures for police funerals in a since-deleted TikTok video in which she pointed out that “we don’t shut down the city” for those who are killed by the police.

The production company with which she was affiliated, Face to Face Films, quickly let her go. At the same time, Patrick J. Lynch, the head of the Police Benevolent Association, told The New York Post that officers needed New Yorkers who stood with them to “speak up and push back,” adding, “This kind of garbage has polluted the conversation for far too long.”

Of course, police unions function primarily to protect their members from precisely the kind of overreaching disciplinary actions that these three were put through. Although Officer Daniel Pantaleo’s chokehold led to Eric Garner’s death in 2014, he was not fired from the force until five years after the fact.

Just last month, a New Orleans police sergeant won his job back a year after he had been fired for racially inflammatory remarks made on social media following Floyd’s murder. One called demonstrators “animals,” whom he would run over if he felt necessary. He suggested that this betrayed no bias because he would react this way to anyone demonstrating in a threatening manner.

In the end, his termination was downgraded to a suspension.

In the shadow of the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge, Fontbonne Hall Academy in Brooklyn has not been hit by the forces of cultural change quite as bluntly as so many other private schools, which have spent the past few years embracing increasingly progressive values.

In the shadow of the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge, Fontbonne Hall Academy in Brooklyn has not been hit by the forces of cultural change quite as bluntly as so many other private schools, which have spent the past few years embracing increasingly progressive values. Founded in 1937 by the Congregation of the Sisters of St. Joseph, an order devoted to the goal of fostering “love, unity and reconciliation,” the girls’ school professes a commitment to “restorative justice.” But when it had the opportunity to put that principle into practice last week, it chose a less forgiving path. Responding to the deaths of police officers, Wilbert Mora and Jason Rivera, who were killed in the line of duty in Harlem last month, Fontbonne instituted a “dress down” day, which gave students a reprieve from uniforms — and the option to wear blue in commemoration — as they raised money for the families of the men who were shot. Resisting the effort, a young teacher named Laura Lynne Duffy announced on Twitter that she would be “intentionally dressing up,” adding the hashtags “BLM” and “Abolition” to her post. The next day, the school announced that it was letting her go after “a thorough investigation.” In private discussions among young alumnae, some took the view that the school had been unduly punitive. But the Facebook page for the Sisters of St. Joseph featured dozens of comments supportive of the school’s decision, with certain posters calling Duffy “hateful,” a “monster” and someone who “should never be allowed to teach ANYWHERE again.” (Neither Duffy nor the various teachers and administrators at Fontbonne responded to repeated requests to talk about what happened.) The dismissal, one among several, suggests that we may have entered a new phase of intolerance. In the current environment, police unions and their sympathizers in and out of the tabloid press have assumed the role of left-wing ideologues, wielding their power to silence views that challenge a prevailing orthodoxy at a time when crime has been challenging and the police feel as if they are operating amid greater dangers. As it happened, Duffy was not the only Brooklyn teacher to be fired as a result of critical comments made about the police. Days earlier, Chris Flanigan, who had been working at Coney Island Prep for just a few weeks, was let go after posting an image to his personal Instagram account of a throng of police officers outside the funeral for Rivera with the text: “5/30/20: NYPD SUV drives into a crowd of protesters. Ideal conditions for reciprocity.” Flanigan was referring to a situation in which a police department vehicle accelerated toward a barricade, knocking people down behind it, in Brooklyn at a demonstration around George Floyd’s murder. Some people interpreted his post as a call for retribution, which makes it harder to defend. Remarking on the teacher’s firing in a statement, Leslie-Bernard Joseph, CEO of Coney Island Prep, a charter school where the majority of students are Black and Latino, said that as public servants, teachers and staff must hold themselves to a “higher standard” and that the school did not “condone or promote violence of any sort.” But Flanigan claimed he did not condone violence either, that he respected “uniform service” and that he had been trying to suggest — however incendiary his language seemed — that the crowd formation had put the police officers in a vulnerable position. He expressed “deep regret” for his comments and said that he had “incredible respect for Coney Island Prep and the community.” But his rash words now appeared to make him irredeemable. Had the ideas he registered on Instagram never made their way to a broader audience, the threats and harassment that he and the school ultimately endured might not have come to pass. Flanigan, who had only 400 Instagram followers at the time, put the post up at midnight on a Friday. By 10 the next morning, he told me, after noticing that a few people had taken issue with his sentiment, he removed it. On Saturday night, however, Flanigan received a call from The New York Post, which had got hold of the posting and planned to run an article about it. It went up several hours later, and early Sunday morning, Flanigan alerted his employers. Although the arts might seem more open to controversial positions, a young actress named Jacqueline Guzman found herself cast aside after she vented and cursed about street closures for police funerals in a since-deleted TikTok video in which she pointed out that “we don’t shut down the city” for those who are killed by the police. The production company with which she was affiliated, Face to Face Films, quickly let her go. At the same time, Patrick J. Lynch, the head of the Police Benevolent Association, told The New York Post that officers needed New Yorkers who stood with them to “speak up and push back,” adding, “This kind of garbage has polluted the conversation for far too long.” Of course, police unions function primarily to protect their members from precisely the kind of overreaching disciplinary actions that these three were put through. Although Officer Daniel Pantaleo’s chokehold led to Eric Garner’s death in 2014, he was not fired from the force until five years after the fact. Just last month, a New Orleans police sergeant won his job back a year after he had been fired for racially inflammatory remarks made on social media following Floyd’s murder. One called demonstrators “animals,” whom he would run over if he felt necessary. He suggested that this betrayed no bias because he would react this way to anyone demonstrating in a threatening manner. In the end, his termination was downgraded to a suspension.

They criticized the NYPD. It cost them their jobs.

Beloved shows removed from the airwaves. A television station cutting from a news report a story about a pregnant police officer who was reportedly fatally shot by the Taliban. A radio editor telling his colleagues to edit out anti-Taliban cheers from coverage of demonstrations in the capital.

Afghanistan’s vibrant free press and media industry, once celebrated as a success story and labeled one of the country’s most important achievements of the past two decades, has abruptly been transformed after the Taliban takeover of the country. Now, its survival is threatened by physical assaults, self-censorship and a dwindling journalist population less than a month after the Taliban seized control of Kabul, the capital, and began enforcing their hard-line Islamist policies.

The Taliban’s crackdown on the free press was even more evident Wednesday after two Afghan journalists were detained and violently assaulted for covering a protest in Kabul. Photos showed the backsides of both reporters covered with bruises and gashes from being whipped repeatedly with cables, sparking an international outcry.

“The situation of free media is very critical,” said Neda, an anchor for a local television station in Kabul, identified by her nickname to protect her identity. “No one dares to ask the Taliban about their past wrongdoings and the atrocities they have committed.”

More than a dozen Afghan journalists, media workers and advocates interviewed by The New York Times said local television networks, newspapers and news websites have continued their coverage under the shadow of fear, intimidation and self-censorship&nbsp;all while struggling to deliver news despite the Taliban releasing very little information.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/another-successful-rescue-flight-from-afghanistan-saves-32-people-from-talibans-rule-412230">Also read |&nbsp;Another successful rescue flight from Afghanistan saves 32 people from Taliban's rule</a>

The Taliban haven’t yet issued any specific instructions for the media, but they have said all Afghan outlets should reset their coverage based on Islamic laws and national interests, both vaguely defined terms that could easily pave the way for the persecution of journalists critical of the new government.

After the previous government collapsed in mid-August, hundreds of media workers, including dozens of journalists, fled the country, according to The Times’ own count. More than half of Afghanistan’s media organisations have halted operations because of safety concerns, an uncertain future and financial problems, said Ahmad Quriashi, director of Afghanistan Journalists Center, a media support organisation.

Under a refugee program expanded by the US Department of State in early August, Afghans employed by US&nbsp;media organisations became eligible for resettlement in the United States, which further fueled the exodus.

The result is an Afghan media that may not be able to recover or regain the freedom it enjoyed in the past two decades.

“It was like a dream,” Quriashi said, referring to the press freedoms that followed the Taliban’s ouster in 2001. Over two decades, Afghan media outlets uncovered corruption, exposed human rights abuses and won international recognition and awards.

Media and entertainment were more broadly transformed, as the United States financed television networks, newspapers and radio stations, helping them reach millions of Afghans throughout the country.

At its height, Afghan media boasted hundreds of outlets operating in the country. In July, the former government’s minister of information and culture, Qasim Wafayezada, said that 248 television networks, 438 radio stations, 1,669 print outlets and 119 news agencies were active across Afghanistan.

But “everything changed overnight for the media” once the Taliban returned to power, Quriashi said, despite the group’s promises to preserve a free press.

Turkish and Indian soap operas that ran on most television networks for hours everyday have vanished in recent weeks, and reality and music shows also have gone off air.

Tolo News, the country’s largest broadcaster, halted the production of Shabake Khanda or “Laughing Network,” a popular political comedy show watched by millions of Afghans on Friday nights.

Even though many female presenters appeared on local televisions a few days after the Taliban’s takeover, hosting shows and reporting on current events, the number appearing on air has since dropped to only four, said Neda, the female television anchor.

The Taliban haven’t allowed female journalists to return to work at the state-owned radio and television station, and have banned most from working with media in the provinces, according to Reporters Without Borders.

“Women journalists must be able to resume working without being harassed as soon as possible,” Christophe Deloire, secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders, said in a statement last week.

The Taliban have also pressured some outlets to share their news reports before publication, according to several journalists who said they refused to comply. And some may be self-censoring negative news for fear of retaliation.

“What we see on local media these days doesn’t reflect the realities on the ground at all,” said Hayat, a reporter for a television network. “We have no other option for now, we have to compromise and censor ourselves until we find a way to leave.”

Etilaat e Roz newspaper is among the few or, according to some, the only media outlet, that has continued covering the news without self-censorship, apparently undeterred by the fearful environment in Kabul. While it has halted its investigative reports due to inaccessibility of information, the paper has been covering the daily news&nbsp;even reports critical of the new Taliban government.

This week, the newspaper experienced the Taliban’s heavy-handed response to critical reporting.

On Wednesday, the Taliban rounded up scores of demonstrators around Kabul and journalists covering the protests, subjecting them to abuse in overcrowded jails, according to journalists who were present. The crackdown on the demonstrations and the ensuing coverage followed a Taliban announcement Tuesday that protests would not be allowed without government approval. At least 19 journalists were detained Tuesday and Wednesday, the United Nations said.

“You’re lucky you have not been beheaded,” Taliban guards told one detained journalist as they kicked him in the head, Ravina Shamdasdani, a spokesperson for the United Nations human rights office in Geneva, told reporters.

Reporters with Etilaat e Roz described being detained at the protests, then brought to a nearby police station where they were tied up and beaten with cables.

Taqi Daryabi, one of the reporters, said about a half-dozen Taliban members handcuffed him behind his back when he was on the ground on his stomach, then began kicking and hitting him until he lost consciousness.

“They beat so much that I couldn’t resist or move,” he said. “They forced me to the ground on my stomach, flogging me on my buttocks and back, and the ones who were in the front were kicking me in the face.”

Reporters working for Tolo News, Ariana News, Pajhwok News Agency and several freelance journalists have also been detained and beaten by the Taliban in the past three weeks, according to local media reports.

“The Taliban is quickly proving that earlier promises to allow Afghanistan’s independent media to continue operating freely and safely are worthless,” Steven Butler, Asia program coordinator for the Committee to Protect Journalists, said in a statement Wednesday. “We urge the Taliban to live up to those earlier promises, to stop beating and detaining reporters doing their job.”

On top of the dangerous environment, the flow of information from the government has slowed and become limited. There used to be dozens of government spokesmen; now there are only a handful speaking for the new Taliban government, and they are less responsive than during the group’s insurgency.

In the late 1990s, the Taliban imposed strict restrictions on the media, banning television and using the state-owned radio and newspapers as propaganda platforms. But the group promised greater openness toward freedom of expression once it seized power last month.

“We will respect freedom of the press, because media reporting will be useful to society and will be able to help correct the leaders’ errors,” Zabihullah Mujahid, the acting deputy information and culture minister, told Reporters Without Borders last week. “We declare to the world that we recognise the importance of the role of the media.”

Many Afghan journalists said those promises are just “words” by Taliban’s leaders, citing recent assaults on reporters in Kabul and elsewhere.

“Press freedom is dead in Afghanistan,” said Quriashi, the media advocate. “And the society without a free press dies.”

Beloved shows removed from the airwaves. A television station cutting from a news report a story about a pregnant police officer who was reportedly fatally shot by the Taliban.

Beloved shows removed from the airwaves. A television station cutting from a news report a story about a pregnant police officer who was reportedly fatally shot by the Taliban. A radio editor telling his colleagues to edit out anti-Taliban cheers from coverage of demonstrations in the capital. Afghanistan’s vibrant free press and media industry, once celebrated as a success story and labeled one of the country’s most important achievements of the past two decades, has abruptly been transformed after the Taliban takeover of the country. Now, its survival is threatened by physical assaults, self-censorship and a dwindling journalist population less than a month after the Taliban seized control of Kabul, the capital, and began enforcing their hard-line Islamist policies. The Taliban’s crackdown on the free press was even more evident Wednesday after two Afghan journalists were detained and violently assaulted for covering a protest in Kabul. Photos showed the backsides of both reporters covered with bruises and gashes from being whipped repeatedly with cables, sparking an international outcry. “The situation of free media is very critical,” said Neda, an anchor for a local television station in Kabul, identified by her nickname to protect her identity. “No one dares to ask the Taliban about their past wrongdoings and the atrocities they have committed.” More than a dozen Afghan journalists, media workers and advocates interviewed by The New York Times said local television networks, newspapers and news websites have continued their coverage under the shadow of fear, intimidation and self-censorship all while struggling to deliver news despite the Taliban releasing very little information. Also read | Another successful rescue flight from Afghanistan saves 32 people from Taliban's rule The Taliban haven’t yet issued any specific instructions for the media, but they have said all Afghan outlets should reset their coverage based on Islamic laws and national interests, both vaguely defined terms that could easily pave the way for the persecution of journalists critical of the new government. After the previous government collapsed in mid-August, hundreds of media workers, including dozens of journalists, fled the country, according to The Times’ own count. More than half of Afghanistan’s media organisations have halted operations because of safety concerns, an uncertain future and financial problems, said Ahmad Quriashi, director of Afghanistan Journalists Center, a media support organisation. Under a refugee program expanded by the US Department of State in early August, Afghans employed by US media organisations became eligible for resettlement in the United States, which further fueled the exodus. The result is an Afghan media that may not be able to recover or regain the freedom it enjoyed in the past two decades. “It was like a dream,” Quriashi said, referring to the press freedoms that followed the Taliban’s ouster in 2001. Over two decades, Afghan media outlets uncovered corruption, exposed human rights abuses and won international recognition and awards. Media and entertainment were more broadly transformed, as the United States financed television networks, newspapers and radio stations, helping them reach millions of Afghans throughout the country. At its height, Afghan media boasted hundreds of outlets operating in the country. In July, the former government’s minister of information and culture, Qasim Wafayezada, said that 248 television networks, 438 radio stations, 1,669 print outlets and 119 news agencies were active across Afghanistan. But “everything changed overnight for the media” once the Taliban returned to power, Quriashi said, despite the group’s promises to preserve a free press. Turkish and Indian soap operas that ran on most television networks for hours everyday have vanished in recent weeks, and reality and music shows also have gone off air. Tolo News, the country’s largest broadcaster, halted the production of Shabake Khanda or “Laughing Network,” a popular political comedy show watched by millions of Afghans on Friday nights. Even though many female presenters appeared on local televisions a few days after the Taliban’s takeover, hosting shows and reporting on current events, the number appearing on air has since dropped to only four, said Neda, the female television anchor. The Taliban haven’t allowed female journalists to return to work at the state-owned radio and television station, and have banned most from working with media in the provinces, according to Reporters Without Borders. “Women journalists must be able to resume working without being harassed as soon as possible,” Christophe Deloire, secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders, said in a statement last week. The Taliban have also pressured some outlets to share their news reports before publication, according to several journalists who said they refused to comply. And some may be self-censoring negative news for fear of retaliation. “What we see on local media these days doesn’t reflect the realities on the ground at all,” said Hayat, a reporter for a television network. “We have no other option for now, we have to compromise and censor ourselves until we find a way to leave.” Etilaat e Roz newspaper is among the few or, according to some, the only media outlet, that has continued covering the news without self-censorship, apparently undeterred by the fearful environment in Kabul. While it has halted its investigative reports due to inaccessibility of information, the paper has been covering the daily news even reports critical of the new Taliban government. This week, the newspaper experienced the Taliban’s heavy-handed response to critical reporting. On Wednesday, the Taliban rounded up scores of demonstrators around Kabul and journalists covering the protests, subjecting them to abuse in overcrowded jails, according to journalists who were present. The crackdown on the demonstrations and the ensuing coverage followed a Taliban announcement Tuesday that protests would not be allowed without government approval. At least 19 journalists were detained Tuesday and Wednesday, the United Nations said. “You’re lucky you have not been beheaded,” Taliban guards told one detained journalist as they kicked him in the head, Ravina Shamdasdani, a spokesperson for the United Nations human rights office in Geneva, told reporters. Reporters with Etilaat e Roz described being detained at the protests, then brought to a nearby police station where they were tied up and beaten with cables. Taqi Daryabi, one of the reporters, said about a half-dozen Taliban members handcuffed him behind his back when he was on the ground on his stomach, then began kicking and hitting him until he lost consciousness. “They beat so much that I couldn’t resist or move,” he said. “They forced me to the ground on my stomach, flogging me on my buttocks and back, and the ones who were in the front were kicking me in the face.” Reporters working for Tolo News, Ariana News, Pajhwok News Agency and several freelance journalists have also been detained and beaten by the Taliban in the past three weeks, according to local media reports. “The Taliban is quickly proving that earlier promises to allow Afghanistan’s independent media to continue operating freely and safely are worthless,” Steven Butler, Asia program coordinator for the Committee to Protect Journalists, said in a statement Wednesday. “We urge the Taliban to live up to those earlier promises, to stop beating and detaining reporters doing their job.” On top of the dangerous environment, the flow of information from the government has slowed and become limited. There used to be dozens of government spokesmen; now there are only a handful speaking for the new Taliban government, and they are less responsive than during the group’s insurgency. In the late 1990s, the Taliban imposed strict restrictions on the media, banning television and using the state-owned radio and newspapers as propaganda platforms. But the group promised greater openness toward freedom of expression once it seized power last month. “We will respect freedom of the press, because media reporting will be useful to society and will be able to help correct the leaders’ errors,” Zabihullah Mujahid, the acting deputy information and culture minister, told Reporters Without Borders last week. “We declare to the world that we recognise the importance of the role of the media.” Many Afghan journalists said those promises are just “words” by Taliban’s leaders, citing recent assaults on reporters in Kabul and elsewhere. “Press freedom is dead in Afghanistan,” said Quriashi, the media advocate. “And the society without a free press dies.”

‘Everything Changed Overnight’: Afghan Reporters Face an Intolerant Regime

A website developer in Japan has curated a platform highlighting neighbourhoods that have 'noisy children'. The platform is being accused of fuelling intolerance. WION's Palki Sharma tells you more.

Gravitas: Japanese website developer maps areas with 'annoying' kids

Are we becoming more intolerant of migrants? Are our current political discourses changing people’s perception and treatment of migrants?

According to new poll by “Gallup”, the world is now less tolerant of migrants. The poll results were divulged on Wednesday, in the wake of Europe setting ground for its asylum plan for migrants.

Countries least accepting

The world’s least accepting countries are led by European nations: North Macedonia, Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia.&nbsp;

In terms of recent change of attitude, the sharpest changes were seen in Ecuador, Peru, and Colombia, which have received more migrants from Venezuela, where the economy has collapsed. In terms of the most welcoming countries for migrants, Canada topped the list. Following Canada were Iceland and New Zealand.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/trump-administration-seeks-sweeping-dna-collection-of-immigrants-327048" hreflang="en">Trump administration seeks sweeping DNA collection of immigrants</a>

To ascertain this, the poll took 140,000 interviews across 145 countries.

The questions were about people responding to the idea of migrants living in their country, and additionally becoming their neighbours, and/or considering the probability of marrying into their families.

The scores on the index ranged from North Macedonia’s 1.49 to Canada’s 8.46, which is almost close to the maximum possible score, which is 9!

What's triggering this change?

Reuters reported that Gallup’s migrant expert Julie Ray acknowledged this shifting pattern, and said that this global fall from 5.21 in 2019, which was down from 5.34 in 2016, is a product of apparent changes in South America.

In Peru alone, people who believed migrants living in their country was a good thing dropped from 61 per cent to 29 per cent.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/lake-turns-into-graveyard-for-migrants-in-turkey-324065" hreflang="en">Lake turns into graveyard for migrants in Turkey</a>

The first ever Gallup Migrant Acceptance Index was conducted in 2015 when over a million people left their countries for parts of Europe in a bid to flee poverty and war.

The US was at #6 on the index, just behind Sierra Leone. According to Ray, as opposed to common belief, Trump supporters were more accepting of migrants than the global average, with a score of 7.10

Taking into account the global pattern, the poll found that migrants were better accepted among younger generations, people with better education, and those who live in urban areas.

Are we becoming more intolerant of migrants? Are our current political discourses changing people’s perception and treatment of migrants? According to new poll by “Gallup”, the world is now less tolerant of migrants.

Are we becoming more intolerant of migrants? Are our current political discourses changing people’s perception and treatment of migrants? According to new poll by “Gallup”, the world is now less tolerant of migrants. The poll results were divulged on Wednesday, in the wake of Europe setting ground for its asylum plan for migrants. Countries least accepting The world’s least accepting countries are led by European nations: North Macedonia, Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia. In terms of recent change of attitude, the sharpest changes were seen in Ecuador, Peru, and Colombia, which have received more migrants from Venezuela, where the economy has collapsed. In terms of the most welcoming countries for migrants, Canada topped the list. Following Canada were Iceland and New Zealand. Also read: Trump administration seeks sweeping DNA collection of immigrants To ascertain this, the poll took 140,000 interviews across 145 countries. The questions were about people responding to the idea of migrants living in their country, and additionally becoming their neighbours, and/or considering the probability of marrying into their families. The scores on the index ranged from North Macedonia’s 1.49 to Canada’s 8.46, which is almost close to the maximum possible score, which is 9! What's triggering this change? Reuters reported that Gallup’s migrant expert Julie Ray acknowledged this shifting pattern, and said that this global fall from 5.21 in 2019, which was down from 5.34 in 2016, is a product of apparent changes in South America. In Peru alone, people who believed migrants living in their country was a good thing dropped from 61 per cent to 29 per cent. Also read: Lake turns into graveyard for migrants in Turkey The first ever Gallup Migrant Acceptance Index was conducted in 2015 when over a million people left their countries for parts of Europe in a bid to flee poverty and war. The US was at #6 on the index, just behind Sierra Leone. According to Ray, as opposed to common belief, Trump supporters were more accepting of migrants than the global average, with a score of 7.10 Taking into account the global pattern, the poll found that migrants were better accepted among younger generations, people with better education, and those who live in urban areas.

World is now more intolerant of migrants than ever before, new poll reveals

The United Arab Emirates is projecting itself as a leader of inter-communal and inter-faith harmony with the first-ever visit by a Catholic pope to the Gulf and an inter-faith conference that is as much about dialogue as it is about absolute political control.

There is no doubt that the UAE is a leader in the Muslim world in promoting concepts of religious tolerance and prevention of religiously packages militancy.

The UAE has bolstered perceptions of its leadership by declaring&nbsp;February, the month of Pope Francis’s visit and the conference, a month of tolerance. The UAE is one of a few, if not the only country, that has a government ministry of tolerance.

The UAE, unlike its ally and more powerful neighbour, Saudi Arabia, increasingly allows adherents of other faiths like Jews, Christians and Hindus, to openly worship and practice their beliefs.

“Today, the UAE is home to 200 different nationalities, more than 40 churches and approximately 700 Christian ministries. Sikh and Buddhist temples welcome multinational congregations. Last year, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi broke ground for a new Hindu temple. Evangelical Christian ministries abound in the country. The Jewish community is vibrant and growing,” Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE’s ambassador to the United States, noted in an op-ed in Politico.

In hosting the pope as the star of an inter-faith dialogue organised by the UAE-sponsored Council of Elders, entitled International Interfaith Meeting on Human Fraternity in the United Arab Emirates, the UAE hopes to cement its position as the icon of Muslim tolerance.

The council is a brainchild of Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar, the revered 1,000-year-old seat of Sunni Muslim learning.

It groups Muslim scholars that in its words purportedly are “known for their wisdom, sense of justice, independence and moderateness…(to).,to promote peace, to discourage infighting and to address the sources of conflict, divisiveness and fragmentation in Muslim communities”

The council is part of a broader UAE and Saudi effort that includes groups like the Global Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies and the Sawab and Hedayah Centres that aim to counter the influence of controversial, Qatar-based Islamic scholar, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood, and more political and militant Islamist forces.

The effort targets any political expression of Islam and promotes an interpretation of the faith that dictates absolute obedience to the ruler. It competes with Turkish efforts to globally promote a more activist form of Islam supportive of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s authoritarianism and Morocco’s projection of itself as a paradigm of Islamic moderation.

Timed to coincide with the council’s meeting, Muhammad bin Abdul Karim Al-Issa, a former Saudi justice minister and secretary general of Saudi Arabia’s Muslim World League, once a major vehicle for the propagation of the kingdom’s intolerant ultra-conservative strand of Islam, highlighted his inter-faith outreach in an op-ed in Newsweek magazine.

“I have travelled to the Vatican to elevate interfaith understanding with His Holiness, Pope Francis. I visited the Grand Synagogue of Paris and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. I welcomed the highest-level delegation of US evangelical Christian leaders ever to visit Saudi Arabia… Among my proudest achievements (as justice minister) was licensing Saudi Arabia’s first women lawyers. I also reformed the Saudi judiciary system,” Al-Issa wrote.

While segments of the justice system were indeed reformed, it remains a system that equates atheism with terrorism, enables authorities to imprison people for the slightest expression of criticism and allows for an anti-corruption campaign that lacks transparency and accountability and has the appearance of a power and asset grab.

In line with ultra-conservative precepts, Al-Issa’s past track record includes denunciation of witchcraft defined as including, among other things astrology, the use of plants for medicine, palm-reading, and animal calling.

In a bid to deprive the council as well as the league of a monopoly on Muslim empathy with non-Muslim groups, Iranian-born Australian Shiite Muslim imam Mohamad Tawhid tweeted on Sunday about his visit to Auschwitz, one of Nazi Germany’s foremost extermination camps for Jews.

“I am proud to be the first ‘Shia’ Muslim Imam to pay his respects at Auschwitz,” Tawhid said in a tweet hashtagged #NeverAgain and featuring a picture of himself sporting a black T-shirt with the slogan #WeRemember.

While there can be no doubt that the UAE’s example of tolerance of non-Muslim belief systems constitutes an important contribution to more harmonious inter-faith relations, there is also little question that it is part of an effort to fortify autocratic rule in the greater Middle East and cement an environment that is intolerant towards any form of criticism or dissent.

In doing so, the UAE’s advocacy of religious tolerance and political intolerance is part of a global struggle about values that underlies tectonic shifts shaping a new world order. That struggle involves a redefinition of concepts of tolerance designed to ensure autocratic regime survival and enhance ways of avoiding and/or resolving conflict without bolstering transparency, accountability and a free flow of ideas.

The dark side of the UAE’s concept of tolerance manifests itself in the country’s conduct together with Saudi Arabia of its four-year-old war in Yemen, the 20-month-old rift in the Gulf with Qatar, and its harsh repression of dissent and freedom of expression

In a letter to the pope, Human Rights Watch called on Pope Francis to use his visit to press the government to address “the serious human rights violations by its forces in Yemen and to end its repression of critics at home.”

The human rights group asserted that the Saudi-UAE military coalition in Yemen had “indiscriminately bombed homes, markets, and schools, impeded the delivery of humanitarian aid, and used widely banned cluster munitions. Domestically, UAE authorities have carried out a sustained assault on freedom of expression and association since 2011. And the many thousands of low-paid migrant workers in the country remain acutely vulnerable to forced labour.”

Sarah Leah Whitson, the group’s Middle East and North Africa director, argued that the Pope was in a position to capitalise on the fact that the UAE is sensitive about its international image that is to a significant extent dependent on projecting itself as a cutting-edge proponent of tolerance in the Muslim world.

In a more hard-hitting comment, Islam scholar Usaama al-Azmi warned that “whether engaged in brutal wars like the one in Yemen with hundreds of thousands displaced and tens of thousands killed or crushing dissent and political liberties at home, the UAE government is no better than its neighbour next door. Yet its savvy PR means that such matters frequently fall below the radar of international observers.”

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

The United Arab Emirates is projecting itself as a leader of inter-communal and inter-faith harmony with the first-ever visit by a Catholic pope to the Gulf and an inter-faith conference that is as much about dialogue as it is about absolute political control.

The United Arab Emirates is projecting itself as a leader of inter-communal and inter-faith harmony with the first-ever visit by a Catholic pope to the Gulf and an inter-faith conference that is as much about dialogue as it is about absolute political control. There is no doubt that the UAE is a leader in the Muslim world in promoting concepts of religious tolerance and prevention of religiously packages militancy. The UAE has bolstered perceptions of its leadership by declaring February, the month of Pope Francis’s visit and the conference, a month of tolerance. The UAE is one of a few, if not the only country, that has a government ministry of tolerance. The UAE, unlike its ally and more powerful neighbour, Saudi Arabia, increasingly allows adherents of other faiths like Jews, Christians and Hindus, to openly worship and practice their beliefs. “Today, the UAE is home to 200 different nationalities, more than 40 churches and approximately 700 Christian ministries. Sikh and Buddhist temples welcome multinational congregations. Last year, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi broke ground for a new Hindu temple. Evangelical Christian ministries abound in the country. The Jewish community is vibrant and growing,” Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE’s ambassador to the United States, noted in an op-ed in Politico. In hosting the pope as the star of an inter-faith dialogue organised by the UAE-sponsored Council of Elders, entitled International Interfaith Meeting on Human Fraternity in the United Arab Emirates, the UAE hopes to cement its position as the icon of Muslim tolerance. The council is a brainchild of Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar, the revered 1,000-year-old seat of Sunni Muslim learning. It groups Muslim scholars that in its words purportedly are “known for their wisdom, sense of justice, independence and moderateness…(to).,to promote peace, to discourage infighting and to address the sources of conflict, divisiveness and fragmentation in Muslim communities” The council is part of a broader UAE and Saudi effort that includes groups like the Global Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies and the Sawab and Hedayah Centres that aim to counter the influence of controversial, Qatar-based Islamic scholar, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood, and more political and militant Islamist forces. The effort targets any political expression of Islam and promotes an interpretation of the faith that dictates absolute obedience to the ruler. It competes with Turkish efforts to globally promote a more activist form of Islam supportive of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s authoritarianism and Morocco’s projection of itself as a paradigm of Islamic moderation. Timed to coincide with the council’s meeting, Muhammad bin Abdul Karim Al-Issa, a former Saudi justice minister and secretary general of Saudi Arabia’s Muslim World League, once a major vehicle for the propagation of the kingdom’s intolerant ultra-conservative strand of Islam, highlighted his inter-faith outreach in an op-ed in Newsweek magazine. “I have travelled to the Vatican to elevate interfaith understanding with His Holiness, Pope Francis. I visited the Grand Synagogue of Paris and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. I welcomed the highest-level delegation of US evangelical Christian leaders ever to visit Saudi Arabia… Among my proudest achievements (as justice minister) was licensing Saudi Arabia’s first women lawyers. I also reformed the Saudi judiciary system,” Al-Issa wrote. While segments of the justice system were indeed reformed, it remains a system that equates atheism with terrorism, enables authorities to imprison people for the slightest expression of criticism and allows for an anti-corruption campaign that lacks transparency and accountability and has the appearance of a power and asset grab. In line with ultra-conservative precepts, Al-Issa’s past track record includes denunciation of witchcraft defined as including, among other things astrology, the use of plants for medicine, palm-reading, and animal calling. In a bid to deprive the council as well as the league of a monopoly on Muslim empathy with non-Muslim groups, Iranian-born Australian Shiite Muslim imam Mohamad Tawhid tweeted on Sunday about his visit to Auschwitz, one of Nazi Germany’s foremost extermination camps for Jews. “I am proud to be the first ‘Shia’ Muslim Imam to pay his respects at Auschwitz,” Tawhid said in a tweet hashtagged #NeverAgain and featuring a picture of himself sporting a black T-shirt with the slogan #WeRemember. While there can be no doubt that the UAE’s example of tolerance of non-Muslim belief systems constitutes an important contribution to more harmonious inter-faith relations, there is also little question that it is part of an effort to fortify autocratic rule in the greater Middle East and cement an environment that is intolerant towards any form of criticism or dissent. In doing so, the UAE’s advocacy of religious tolerance and political intolerance is part of a global struggle about values that underlies tectonic shifts shaping a new world order. That struggle involves a redefinition of concepts of tolerance designed to ensure autocratic regime survival and enhance ways of avoiding and/or resolving conflict without bolstering transparency, accountability and a free flow of ideas. The dark side of the UAE’s concept of tolerance manifests itself in the country’s conduct together with Saudi Arabia of its four-year-old war in Yemen, the 20-month-old rift in the Gulf with Qatar, and its harsh repression of dissent and freedom of expression In a letter to the pope, Human Rights Watch called on Pope Francis to use his visit to press the government to address “the serious human rights violations by its forces in Yemen and to end its repression of critics at home.” The human rights group asserted that the Saudi-UAE military coalition in Yemen had “indiscriminately bombed homes, markets, and schools, impeded the delivery of humanitarian aid, and used widely banned cluster munitions. Domestically, UAE authorities have carried out a sustained assault on freedom of expression and association since 2011. And the many thousands of low-paid migrant workers in the country remain acutely vulnerable to forced labour.” Sarah Leah Whitson, the group’s Middle East and North Africa director, argued that the Pope was in a position to capitalise on the fact that the UAE is sensitive about its international image that is to a significant extent dependent on projecting itself as a cutting-edge proponent of tolerance in the Muslim world. In a more hard-hitting comment, Islam scholar Usaama al-Azmi warned that “whether engaged in brutal wars like the one in Yemen with hundreds of thousands displaced and tens of thousands killed or crushing dissent and political liberties at home, the UAE government is no better than its neighbour next door. Yet its savvy PR means that such matters frequently fall below the radar of international observers.” (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Pope visit boosts UAE efforts to redefine concepts of tolerance

At the highly-anticipated speech at the RSS's Tritiya Varsh event in Nagpur former president and veteran Congress leader &nbspDr Pranab Mukherjee said any attempt at defining our nationhood in terms of dogma and identities or religion, region, hatred and intolerance will only lead to dilution of our identity.&nbsp

''Our national identity has emerged after a long drawn process of confluence and assimilation, the multiple cultures and faiths make us special and tolerant,'' the former president said.&nbsp

Batting for pluralism at the RSS event, the Congress leader said he was there to share his understanding on the concepts of nation, nationalism and patriotism in the context of India.&nbsp

''As Gandhi ji explained Indian nationalism was not exclusive nor aggressive nor destructive,'' Mukherjee noted.&nbsp

The former president also quoted from the first prime minister of India Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's book 'Discovery of India,' and stated nationalism can only come out of the ideological fusion of Hindu, Muslims, Sikhs and other groups in India.

''It was this very nationalism that Pandit Nehru so vividly expressed in the book 'Discovery of India', he wrote, "I am convinced that nationalism can only come out of the ideological fusion of Hindu, Muslims, Sikhs and other groups in India,": Dr Pranab Mukherjee in Nagpur

Batting for pluralism at the RSS event, Pranab Mukherjee said he was there to share his understanding on the concepts of nation, nationalism and patriotism in the context of India

At the highly-anticipated speech at the RSS's Tritiya Varsh event in Nagpur former president and veteran Congress leader &nbspDr Pranab Mukherjee said any attempt at defining our nationhood in terms of dogma and identities or religion, region, hatred and intolerance will only lead to dilution of our identity. ''Our national identity has emerged after a long drawn process of confluence and assimilation, the multiple cultures and faiths make us special and tolerant,'' the former president said. Batting for pluralism at the RSS event, the Congress leader said he was there to share his understanding on the concepts of nation, nationalism and patriotism in the context of India. ''As Gandhi ji explained Indian nationalism was not exclusive nor aggressive nor destructive,'' Mukherjee noted. The former president also quoted from the first prime minister of India Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's book 'Discovery of India,' and stated nationalism can only come out of the ideological fusion of Hindu, Muslims, Sikhs and other groups in India. ''It was this very nationalism that Pandit Nehru so vividly expressed in the book 'Discovery of India', he wrote, "I am convinced that nationalism can only come out of the ideological fusion of Hindu, Muslims, Sikhs and other groups in India,": Dr Pranab Mukherjee in Nagpur

Intolerance will dilute our national identity: Pranab Mukherjee

Religious intolerance has exacerbated polarisation

Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism. That’s in order of the alphabet, not of preference, or greatness. These major world religions were either founded by prophets who trod the earth or, evolved through the mists of ancient mythology. And they contain one, common message: tolerance, even of those who choose another God. In terms of followers, the world’s biggest religions are Christianity, Islam and Hinduism. Then there are other small but equally global faiths, Judaism and Buddhism. The last, especially, is legendary for its consistency in preaching and largely practicing compassion. Some choose a mosque. Others a temple. Some attend churches, others frequent synagogues. × Some choose a mosque. Others a temple. Some attend churches, others frequent synagogues. We inhabit the same cities, eat the produce of the same earth, work at similar jobs. We hang out at my place for Diwali, his for Christmas, hers for Id, yours for Rosh Hashanah. At least that’s what most thought till - it all began to change. It’s Christians vs, Muslims, Muslims vs Jews, Buddhists vs Christians, Hindus vs Muslims today. It’s either my way or - the highway. You either worship my God or - I’ll force you to do so. Religious tolerance is yesterday’s news. Polarisation is the hallmark of today’s world. Be it in society or politics, in the classroom or the boardroom, religious intolerance is polarising the world today. Christianity: "One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables, let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another?" That’s the Sixth Book of the New Testament - the Bible, the holy scripture for 2.2 billion people in the world ie, 31.5 per cent of the globe’s population. But way back in the 12th century, early practitioners of the faith opened one of the worst chapters in the history of Christianity: the Inquisitions. This kind of 'portable' religious court was first held in France. It was a period marked by witch-hunt, lynching and forcible conversions. By the end of the 14th century, hundreds of Jews were killed in Spain and later across its South American colonies. × The intention was to prosecute Catholics who were attracted by other churches. The practice soon spread to other countries like Spain and Portugal. Those colonial powers took it to the next level. They began to hold harsh, cruel inquisitions in their colonial properties in Africa, Asia and the America. Their favourite targets were those Jews and Muslims who had converted to Christianity only to find that the Catholic colonial masters hauled them again: this time, to question their commitment. By the end of the 14th century, mistrust had turned into deep hatred. Hundreds of Jews were killed in Spain and later across its South American colonies. Historians say the Portuguese were far worse. Their inquisition began in 1536 and soon, a cruel and tyrannical version moved to Brazil and - to Goa, their tiny colony on India’s West Coast. In Goa, the chief targets were Hindus and Muslims. First, there were conversions by force. Anyone who resisted was tortured or burnt alive. Those who converted but practised Indian rituals soon faced harsh inquisitions because the slightest deviation raised doubts about their commitment to Christianity. This tyranny began in 1560 and continued for 252 years. Anyone in Goa could be tortured merely for possessing a Hindu religious symbol. In the late 1800s, the inquisitions also hunted down practitioners of witchcraft, cult-leaders and even bigamists. The horrors are depicted vividly in Guardians of The Dawn, a bestselling historical novel set in Portuguese Goa. WION spoke to Richard Zimler, its author. "We’re talking about fundamentalists even way back then. That’s the danger and there is a need for all of us to oppose fundamentalism of any kind. The Portuguese would not allow anyone who had converted to Christianity to continue to practice their traditional religion," he says. "My book did very well in Portugal. There were some who said I was painting Portugal in a bad light but I am happy to expose the truth and fight against fundamentalism". Mindless executions, forcible conversions, unmitigated cruelty and violence towards all who oppose them. These are the hallmarks of terror groups like the Islamic State (I.S.) today. Only their God has a different name, as does their holy book. Zimler agrees that today's violence is nothing but a repeat of the crusades. The Inquisitions gradually stopped but - anti-semitism persisted. Indeed, hatred for Jews pervaded even literature and the fine arts and didn’t escape many of the world's greatest writers. Like William Shakespeare's clichéd caricature, that of the greedy moneylender, Shylock. Or Charles Dickens' conniving villain, Fagin. That xenophobia reached its pinnacle under Adolf Hitler. The Holocaust is one of the worst genocides known in the history of mankind. × In a cold-blooded and systematic operation that included instruments of torture and factories of death that boggle the mind, 6 million innocent Jewish men, women and children were killed. The Holocaust is one of the worst genocides known in the history of mankind. And three generations of Germans continue to struggle with the question: how could their forefathers have allowed Hitler and his Nazis to carry out this unbridled manslaughter? "Crimes against humanity should never be forgotten," said German Chancellor Angela Merkel at a sombre memorial service for the victims of the Holocaust. "We have the perpetual responsibility to transmit the knowledge of the atrocities committed in the past and to keep alive their memory." Unsurprisingly and given that murderous past, Germany and all EU member-states have grounded their constitutions firmly in the tenets of the European Convention on Human Rights. Germany has more than adhered to its own, by taking in millions of refugees fleeing from troubled countries, even economic refugees in the guise of persecution. But is darkness really a thing of the past in Europe? There has been a steady rise of the extreme right-wing all over the Continent again in recent years. Its graph rose upwards even and especially during a crippling recession. And when refugees on the run from the US-led war in Syria and Iraq started pouring into Europe in 2015, even Scandinavian countries with the most magnanimous asylum policies, like Sweden, began to see a rise in neo-Nazi popularity. Today, Europe is simmering with intolerance. Xenophobia even finds representation in various provincial parliaments. There are the Swedish Democrats, there is the Alternative for Germany, there is the Front National in France, there’s the Freedom Party in Austria which is slated to form the next coalition government. Since the September 11 attacks in New York in 2001, there have been more than 900 terror strikes in Europe. × And much like in the United States, there’s a new scapegoat here in Europe too: Muslims. When France’s right-wing leader Marine Le Pen was asked by a television interviewer whether Muslim people should be allowed to wear headscarves, she said, "No I am opposed to headscarves being worn in public places. France is not burqinis on the beach. France is Brigitte Bardot". Since the September 11 attacks in New York in 2001, there have been more than 900 terror strikes in Europe. The fact that most were at the hands of Islamist terror groups like the Islamic State has only fanned the fires of religious intolerance. Islam: "For you is your religion, and for me is my religion". That’s what the Quran says, possibly the most hotly debated holy book of all in recent times. Islamist terrorism is wreaking havoc and spilling rivers of blood across the world. The criminals have several motives, to convert the entire world to Islam and reduce women to subservience. They swear by the Quran and that’s unfortunate because by doing so, they are maligning millions of tolerant Muslims too. The Quran also makes one thing very clear, "There shall be no compulsion in the religion". So how and when did this fanaticism begin? This unholy ‘holy war’, or ‘jehad’? Where does the Quran tell its followers to kill innocents in the name of faith? Or is everyone except Islamist terrorists, many of whom are nurtured, trained and armed by Pakistan to target India misreading the Quran? Are millions of moderate Muslims living in La-La Land? Many scholars point to the West’s own unholy Crusades to enforce Christianity around the world. Some of the unholiest Crusades were in Islamic countries, including in the Middle East, where Islam was born. Thirty-five years ago, the Iranian Revolution changed the fabric of Iranian society. But it also changed the geopolitics of the Middle East and redrew the map of global alliances. × Much like the cosmopolitan capitals of the west, Iran was a turnpike on the global map of the swinging sixties, mini skirts, bars, the races, balls, concert halls, fashion, theatre and emancipated women working alongside men, and dressed as they pleased. So when and how, did all that change, and was the change really all that bad? Are those elements really the criteria, as the West likes to believe of a stable and democratic society? When Iran’s Islamic Revolution brought radical changes, were the Iranians quite relieved to be rid of a tyrannical regime? Thirty-five years ago, the Iranian Revolution changed the fabric of Iranian society. But it also changed the geopolitics of the Middle East and redrew the map of global alliances. It was a populist Shia uprising that replaced the dictatorial monarchy with an Islamic theocracy. And it was unique and surprised the world because it carried none of the usual hallmarks of a revolution: War, financial crisis, national debt or a weak army. A renowned scholar of Iranian studies, Dr Majid Tafreshi spoke to WION and explained what led to the Revolution and beyond. "In the 40s and 50s, the then-new King Mohammed Reza Shah had good relations with the Olama (Ullema / clergy) but after the death of an Ayatollah in the early 60s, that relationship turned confrontational", says Dr Tafreshi. "Then came the new phenomenon Ayatollah Khomeini. He was a charismatic character and had dedicated followers. Gradually, he became the political and religious leader in Iran. An early confrontation of the Shah in 1963 was put down. But though most people took that as a sign that the Shah was in control, 1963 was, in reality, the beginning of the end of the Shah and monarchy in Iran." Predictably, the inordinate interest in Iran’s affairs on part of the West. They wanted to control the Shah whose importance had grown along with that of Iran’s oil reserves. A revolution and an ouster of the Shah at that point in time was considered "highly inconvenient". Dr Tafreshi says that this is the reason why the United States government tried hard to prevent an uprising. Afghanistan changed from a secular state into a turbulent republic, struggling to strike a compromise between conservative Islam and Western-style modernity and remains to this day, in search of its true identity. × But it met with no success. The revolution changed the face of Iran drastically. It also inspired similar uprisings across the Middle East. There is western perception about life in today’s Iran. But there is also the Iranian determination to never bow to western hegemony. To experience what life in Iran is really like, observers would do themselves a favour by avoiding media reports emanating in the West and experiencing it for themselves. During the 7th century, Caliphate Arabs made their way onwards to Afghanistan. That country’s subsequent history has seen many constitutional changes including the establishment of the Sharia as the state religion in 1931. By 1977, Afghanistan’s constitution had twice been tweaked and made more secular to use a contested word. By then, Afghanistan was fully modelled along the lines of a modern country with a penal code and civil law. Islamic movements in Afghanistan were born in the late fifties but had remained relatively passive. By the late seventies, they gained in popularity among sections of the population which felt alienated by Western-style democracy. By the time the Soviet Union invaded in support of a communist force in Kabul, there was a solid resurgence of the Islamic movement. But from the birth of a unified mujahedin to push out a foreign invader to a radical Islamist Al Quaida, Taliban and now the Islamic State is a long leap of the leap for the imagination. But happen it did. Afghanistan changed from a secular state into a turbulent republic, struggling to strike a compromise between conservative Islam and Western-style modernity and remains to this day, in search of its true identity. Hinduism: Valmiki’s Ramayana, the epic poem on the banishment of God Rama, describes the god as one "who cared for equality to all". × ‘’For those who live magnanimously, the entire world is a family.” This is stated in the Upanishads, Hinduism’s ancient philosophical texts that are said to have been compiled between 800 and 500 BCE, ie, before the birth of Jesus Christ. The message is repeated in various ways in other Hindu religious texts, even after reformers began to question some of its practices and beliefs. Valmiki’s Ramayana, the epic poem on the banishment of God Rama, describes the god as one "who cared for equality to all". Hinduism has been the mothership of many other new religions – Jainism, Buddhism – and has always been viewed as a way of life, a tolerant philosophy, more than as a diktat to worship a particular set of divinities. Critics of Hinduism point to its division of society into castes and the inequality that persists between those castes, even in modern India. Other scholars claim that the caste system, in ancient times, was merely an administrative division of people according to their professions. In the seventy years since India’s independence, laws have been passed, the abhorrent concept of ‘untouchability’ long stands banned. Surely a radical improvement? Not according to former police officer and Dalit rights activist, S.R. Darapuri. "The rigours of the caste system in the past have undoubtedly been very harsh", Darapuri told WION. "There was a lot of distance between various castes and the lower caste was subjected to much discrimination. It is true caste rigors have slackened to an extent in modern India. The caste system doesn’t seem to work particularly in the urban context. In rural India, the law has not been able to overcome caste discrimination. The caste system has the religious sanction of Hinduism. As long as Hinduism remains in its present form, the caste system will continue because there is no Hindu who has no caste. × When untouchability was abolished, the practice decreased to an extent. But it still very much exists. The caste system has the religious sanction of Hinduism. And as long as Hinduism remains in its present form, the caste system will continue because there is no Hindu who has no caste. Indeed, it is the religious duty of a Hindu to observe caste practices and obligations. Darapuri emphatically dismisses the racial theory on the origin of caste and points to Dr Ambedkar’s book, The Untouchables. In it, the author of India’s Constitution cites the anthropological evidence that lower and higher castes belong to the same racial stock. The activist makes no bones to point that the division of labor theory about caste holds no water too. After all, he argues, if it caste originated only to distinguish professions, then surely it ought to change when an individual change his area of work. "The caste system is one of superiority and inferiority", sums up Darapuri. Though the caste system can even be discerned even among converts to other religions in India, caste wars were essentially a Hindu phenomenon. To other foreigners like Arab traders who came landed in Kerala, the relationship with the Hindus was good. Soon Arab and Persian traders began to settle in Gujarat. Ismaili Islam took root in the western Indian state. But by the 12th century, a different kind of Islam, one more strident and eerily similar in zeal and ferocity to the Christian Crusades, began to arrive in Northern India. Sindh in today's Pakistan became a province of the Umayyad caliphate. Then came Mahmud of Ghazni, leaving a bloody trail of loot, plunder and murder along with his way. He conquered Punjab and his marauding armies even reached Gujarat. By the end of the 12th century, the Delhi Sultanate was born. Then came the Mughals, some cruel and zealous about forcing conversion, others benign and more bent on creating an integrated society. But those were harsh conquerors, ancient times. By the time the last Mughal was overthrown by the British Empire and before the latter could indulge one more time in its classical game of Divide and Rule that saw India and Pakistan separate, Muslims and Hindus had come together with one common goal: to shake off British rule. And succeed they did. But what happened decades later? For an old mosque to be destroyed? For riots to erupt between India’s Hindus and Muslims? Call it the debut of religion in politics, lay it at opportunism’s door. If there is one religious teaching that focuses entirely on the principle of tolerance and non-violence, it is Buddhism. × Judaism and Buddhism: "The Torah was given to mankind in order to establish peace," reads an excerpt from Judaism's holy book. But the Jews of Israel continue to live in one of the most turbulent regions in the world. Followers of Judaism don't outnumber Christians, Muslims or Hindus. And yet, it is their controversial politics that continues to take centre-stage in the global arena today. "One is not called noble who harms living beings", reads the Dhammapada. One of the Buddha's most renowned followers, Emperor Ashoka, carried that message forward: "The faiths of others all deserve to be honoured for one reason or another". If there is one religious teaching that focuses entirely on the principle of tolerance and non-violence, it is Buddhism. And yet, there are militant factions even among followers of Gautama Buddha. In Sri Lanka, where radicalised monks have targeted Muslims and other minorities. In Myanmar, where the Rohingya Muslim minority has borne the wrath of similarly militant Buddhists. What happened to the world's most gentle religion? If Buddhists can be polarised, is there any hope left for the rest of the world? This is the second article of WION's three-part series "Poles Apart". The first article was published on 17/10/17.

'In the name of the Father'

intolerance

Intolerance, News on Intolerance, stories on Intolerance, articles on Intolerance, Intolerance stories at Wion, Intolerance news, Intolerance latest news