Muslims And The Press

The power of the press can be gauged by the use of the term ‘The Fourth Estate’ to describe it. Although its origins go far back in time it did not acquire the definite and effective form of an organized means of mass communication until the end of the 19^th century, the first course in journalism being given at the University of Missouri, Columbia, from 1879 to 1884. Throughout the 20^th century it has gradually gone from strength to strength.

By the end of the 19^th century, the Muslims as a community had entered the field of journalism in earnest. Probably the first notable Muslims paper was Al-‘Urwatul Wusqa, brought out by Syed Jamaluddin Afghani and Mufti Muhammad ‘Abduhu in 1883. Anti-British in sentiment, its objective was to unite Muslims all over the world as a means of putting an end to British colonialism.

Since that time, tens of thousands of magazines and periodicals have been brought out in a variety of Muslims languages. I myself have been reading Muslims periodicals in the original in three languages – Arabic, English and Urdu – and to some extent have read periodicals in other languages in translation. In this paper, I propose to make an evaluation of the Muslim press in the light of the considerable information which I have at my disposal. But first of all, a set of criteria shall have to be adopted b which we may judge the two basic aspects of journalism, namely presentation and content. I would suggest that our yardstick for presentation should be the Western press, and our criterion for content should be the Qur’an.

Setting up the Western press as a standard by which to judge the Muslims press on its presentation is perfectly justifiable, since no other press in the world can match its level of excellence. Judged by this standard, the Muslim press is so far behind in every respect that assigning a place to it in the hierarchy of standards is simply not possible.

In terms of circulation, the Western press, with its direct access to global news, has already achieved an international status, whereas the Muslim press, with its dependence on indirect sources of information, suffers from such limitation as to make it barely or regional interest. Today the whole world looks to the Western press for international news, while the Muslim press is not, so far, an accepted source even of Muslim news.

This difference of standard between the two is underscored by the fact that, to date, all over the world, news of Muslim importance is sought after in the Western press, not only by non-Muslims but also by Muslims themselves. A recent instance of this reliance on the Western media was demonstrated during the period leading up to the signing of the agreement between Israel and the PLO on the subject of mutual recognition – surely one of the most important events of the Muslim world. Right from the beginning of the negotiations till the actual signing of the agreement in Washington on September 13, the Western media, and not the Muslim press, remained the principal source of all information on this topic for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

One very important asset of the Western press is the high intellectual caliber of its staff, which is the main reason for the excellence of its academic and journalistic standards. Muslim journalism, on the contrary, has suffered from the general lack of awareness among Muslims which in turn has discouraged men of superior intellect from engaging themselves in the field. In its failure to measure up to the high standards of the present day, the Muslim press has had little or no impact upon public opinion. It would be quite correct to say that it exist in name only.

Now let us examine the content of Muslim journalism from the standpoint of Qur’anic standards. It may seem strange to compare modern journalism with the scriptures, but this is not really so, for the writing of the Qur’an took place – without ascription – in the manner of modern journalism. That is, the contents of the Qur’an were not revealed all together in the form of a book, but came in installments – or as men of religion would say, in separate revelations – over a period of twenty three years. So that the Qur’an was like a periodical which was started in 610 AD, reaching its completion only in 632 AD.

As well as providing the archetypal form for modern journalism, the Qur’an had the selfsame objectives as those of our modern press, namely, to guide people at critical moments, to help solve their problems and to set the course for their thinking and action. Now let us see what method was adopted in the Qur’an over this period of twenty three years.

The revelation of the Qur’an started in ancient Mecca. At that time, a number of pressing issues presented themselves not only in Mecca throughout Arabia. For instance, the holy Ka’bah housed 360 idols. The Roman and the Iranian empires had made political inroads into Arabia. There were many evils, and crime was widespread among the tribes. Yet the first commandment revealed in the Qur’an made no reference to any of these problems. On the contrary, the first commandment of the Qur’an was, ‘iqra’ (read).

Given Arabia’s condition at that time, it might have been expected that the first verse of the Qur’an would be either a protest, or a command to wage war. But it was not. Instead, the Qur’an gave the very positive injunction to ‘read!’ In other words, to think positively in the face of adversity. Let others follow the path of destruction: one’s own course should be that of construction. It was strong in its advocacy of the power of peace as opposed to that of violence. It guided the oppressed to shun the path of violence in favour of adherence to the principle of non-violent activism.

This means that the first part of the Qur’an counsels against head-on confrontations in the attempt to deal with life’s problems. Instead, it advises trying to get at the root cause of the trouble. The most obvious root cause of many problems is the lack of perception and judgement which stems from poor education, or no education at all. With the spread of education, this ignorance, which underlies so much of the evil in the world today, could be banished. This in turn would facilitate the solution of many different kinds of problems.

A similar revelation was made on the occasion of the Hudaybiyyah controversy, when Mecca leaders refused to let Muslims enter Mecca for the performance of ‘Umrah (a minor pilgrimage, which can be performed at any time of the year). This revelation in no way incited the Muslims at that point in time to wage war against the enemy. Instead, it enjoined the Muslims to adopt the path of avoidance in order to counter the display of arrogance and prejudice on the part of the Meccans, and to go back after entering into a peace treaty with them. Thus, on such a delicate and sensitive occasion, Muslims were advised that the power of peace was greater than the power of war. They were advised, therefore, to forsake the path of war and taste the fruits of peace.

 

Judged by Qur’anic standards, Muslims journalism falls far below par. While the Qur’anic ‘periodical’ was run on positive lines, the entire Muslim press of the present day is plunged in negativism. Where the Qur’an stressed the importance of action and the avoidance of reaction, present-day Muslim journalism as a whole is oriented towards and motivated by reaction. During the last days of the Muslims in Mecca (shortly before the emigration) when they had been cruelly persecuted by the Meccan non-Muslims, this verse of the Qur’an was revealed: ‘Truly with hardship comes ease, truly with hardship comes ease’ (94:5-6). That is to say that for this world God has decreed that facility, or ease should exist side by side with difficulty, seek opportunities and avail of them. But today Muslim journalism has devoted itself entirely to the ferreting out of difficulties, mainly plots and conspiracies of others against them.

If we were to place the revelations of the Qur’an on a parallel with the investigative , informative, and advisory functions of the modern press, the most appropriate, although anachronistic term for them would be ‘constructive journalism’. Where the parallel ends is in the failure of modern Muslim journalism – unlike the Qur’an – to be constructive. I would say that, on the contrary, it is run on the very opposite principle. Hundreds and thousands of newspapers and periodicals are brought out by Muslims but, although they all appear under different titles, they might well be lumped together under the single title of ‘Protest’. If we substituted ‘Protest Daily,’ ‘Protest Weekly,’ ‘Protest Monthly,’ for their original titles, this would in no way be inappropriate to their contents.

In the light of Qur’anic wisdom, the true role of the press should be constructive, not expostulatory. Protest is nothing but a negative reaction which, with constant repetition, builds up a paranoid mentality. It encourages peevishness and irritability, which are hardly the mental states we need for a positive, practical struggle. Of course, we need our press to have a powerful reach, but it must cultivate the kind of constructive thinking which will lead to a re-generation of the Muslim community. Regeneration can come about only through self-construction. It can never result from the mere lodging of protests against others.

Now, the question arises as to how the Muslim press developed into a medium of protest. In the 19^th century, when the power of the press was building up, that was the very time that the Muslims were divested of political power. It was this concatenation of events which produced the mindset due to which the entire Muslim press has taken the shape of an organ of protest in modern times. This is the reality, but Muslim leaders, then and now, have projected the loss of power as a matter of usurpation, brought to fruition by plots and conspiracies. It is surely a low of nature that those who make progress are entitled to a position of dominance. The reverse is also necessarily true. So why should the Muslims consider themselves an exception to that rule ? if they remained backward, they deserved to fall from power. Muslim leaders, however, unwilling or unable to face the facts, traced the decline of their community to the machinations of the West. 

Had the Muslim leaders been of a different mentality, they might have made a more profound study of the situation; they would then have discovered that the subjugation of the Muslims was, in fact, due to their own inability to progress with the times. This would have resulted in their urging the press to devote itself to Muslim reconstruction. Journalists would then have worked towards bringing about an awareness among Muslims of the need for modern education. Only in that way would their feet have been set on the path of progress.  Only then would they have realized that it was the time for self-preparation rather than the time for jihad.

That would have been the correct approach. Had Muslim leaders and journalist subscribed to this way of thinking, they would have impressed upon their public how imperative it was for them to remain patient in the face of Western dominance, and to devote all their time and energy to the field of construction. Modern circumstances demanded patience, but Muslims could think of nothing but protest.

Today, Muslims – Indian Muslims in particular – place continuing emphasis on having their own press in English. Its aim, according to them, is the proper presentation of their case before other nations. It is probably due to this mentality that we see the unique phenomenon unparalleled in any other community, of a number of papers being brought out with purely communal or nation national titles, such as, ‘The Voice of Ummah,’ ‘Muslim Outlook,’ ‘The Call of the Ummah,’ etc.

The reason for such papers to have purely communal titles is traceable to the image the Muslims cherish of themselves as being faultless and above reproach. When their shortcomings and excesses have been pointed out by national newspapers and periodicals , they have felt – consciously or unconsciously – that that was not a true picture of them, and as a matter of self-vindication, they wanted to publish papers which would correct what they felt were erroneous impressions by projecting Muslims as absolutely perfect, but ill-treated human beings.

It is significant that papers of this sort published in English over the last fifty years have either failed and ceased publication, or, if they are still in existence, take the form of highly abridged Muslim bulletins rather than full-fledged Muslim newspapers.

The reason for this failure is quite simple.  Where the national press presents the Muslim cases as it is, as a totality, the Muslim press gives only half the picture.  For instance, in the Bhagalpur riots in October, 1989, bombs were initially set off by Muslims.  It was only after this that Hindus set fire to Muslim properties.  The national press described the acts of both the communities, including the fact that the Hindu destruction of Muslim property has been on a much larger scale than the damage caused by Muslim bombs, yet, flying in the face of the facts, the Muslims wanted no mention of bomb-throwing.  They wanted only the burning of their property by the Hindus to be highlighted.  Similarly, when the Babari Masjid was demolished on December 6, 1992, the Muslims of Bombay wanted no mention of their subsequent rioting and destruction, which sparked off Hindu acts of revenge, again on a much larger scale.  They wanted facts damaging to themselves to be suppressed, so that they might appear to be the innocent, injured party. 

This attitude extends to every important sphere of Muslim existence.  For example, the number of Muslims existence.  For example, the number of Muslims in government service is very small, mostly because very few Muslims attain the necessary level of education.  When this subject is covered by the national press, the paucity of Muslims in government office is underlined, but at the same time, the reason for this – namely, their lack of education – is also stressed.  The Muslims, on the contrary, want everyone to know that they are under –represented in government service, but they want all mention of their backwardness to be omitted.

Again, during the Afghanistan war, the national press gave equal credit to the valour of the Afghan Mujahidin and the assistance given by the Americans.  The Muslim press, on the contrary, want to keep the Americans out of the picture – although the help they gave was quite extraordinary – and give full credit to the Afghan Mujahidin.  They act in this way because they want to prove that Muslims are entirely virtuous and innocent of all wrongdoing, and that if they appear to have shortcomings, it is because of the harsh treatment meted out to them by others.  

It is on the basis of this kind of one-sided and partial news reporting that Muslims want to create their own press. What they do not realize is that the world for which they want to create such a press has neither any need of it nor any interest in it. Such papers, issued by Muslims are destined to be read by Muslims. In this world of cause and effect, such efforts cannot have any other result.

Another issue, which despite massive coverage, the Muslim press has failed to influence, is that of Zionism vis-à-vis that Arab world.  Over the last fifty years, Muslim journalist s have devoted all their energies to writing against Zionism and the existence of Israel as a sovereign state, but to no avail. As a journalistic campaign, this was a complete failure. The Egyptian President Anwar Sadat recognized Israel in the Camp David agreement in 1979, and although the PLO (the Palestine Liberation Organisation) continued to reject Israel, it finally surrendered after a period of 14 years, giving its formal recognition to Israel at a function held in Washington on September 13, 1993. This event, the culmination of so many years of struggling for the very opposite outcome, is to the discredit of all sections of the Muslim press. It could neither avert the tragedy of Israel’s being set up as a Sovereign state, not could it lessen the pain of its consequences for the Arab world. The PLO’s recognition of Israel ought to be an eye-opener for Muslims journalists everywhere. Now it is high time the basic weakness and shortcomings of the Muslim press were acknowledged so that it may be reshaped anew.

To me, the Muslim press has been suffering from what I can only call quite injustifiable self-righteousness on the part of Muslim intellectuals. It is this innate weakness which has prevented them from seeing their own shortcomings. All they can see is the plots of others behind every problem their community faces. Consequently, instead of engaging themselves in constructive activities, they spend their time inciting members of their community to protest against others.

Journalism of this kind will only lull the community to sleep by providing it with doses of opium: it cannot become the means of its regeneration. This is the modern reality of the Muslim press. It must also be conceded that neither at the present nor in the near future can Muslims bring their journalism up to the standard of the day. One basic reason is that modern journalism is fed by industry, and that is a field in which Muslims have yet to find a noteworthy place. For this reason, it is my firm opinion that, at the moment, Muslims are in no position to achieve an international status for their press. That being so, what ought we to do? I think in this matter our first step should be to heed the wisdom of the old saying: ‘Begin at the beginning.’

If we can adopt this realistic approach, we shall soon discover that, despite all deterrent factors, we are in a position to make an effective start on substantially improving the quality of Muslim journalism.  By first setting aside the impossible, we must explore actual opportunities and from that point make our beginning, for the right beginning guarantees the right end. 

One vital step is to provide good training to Muslim youths, and help them to enter various newspapers and news agencies.  Over the last few years, a certain number of young Muslims have entered these fields.  But this has only happened sporadically as the result of their own personal motivation.  There is no such general awareness of journalistic imperatives and opportunities in the Muslim community. 

 

Another important point is that any community paper which is brought out should be of a very high standard.  Moreover, Muslim periodicals should be published in the mother tongue of their readers, so that language may not prove an obstacle to bringing about an awareness of the times and a sense of commitment at the community level.  They should also stop encouraging their readers to achieve their objectives by the continual lodging of protests and instead point the way to modern opportunities, with exhortations to make the best possible use of them.

It is essential to cultivate journalistic consciousness among the educated class of Muslims.  This seminar constitutes an important step towards that goal and, as such, is highly praiseworthy.  Efforts of this nature must continue and expand in their scope.

Muslim journalism’s greatest shortcoming is that it presents no model of excellence to the young people of our community.  Today, Muslim journalism is almost entirely of the ‘yellow’ variety – hardly a shining example to give to budding journalists.  The reason for its being of this hue is that, in the absence of any support from industry, it must resort to unscrupulous sensationalism in order to survive.  There is really no alternative.  That is the price that journalism pays for the Muslims’ industrial backwardness. 

Exemplary journalism can only be brought into existence by making sacrifices.  If a team of educated Muslims could muster enough courage to bring out a model paper and, irrespective of recurring losses, continue to maintain its high standard, this would indeed be a welcome breakthrough as well as a great feat.  In the present circumstances, there is no other way to bring out a paper of quality. 

To ensure that Muslims make an effective entry into the field of journalism, one positive and result-yielding step would be to open a Muslim school of journalism, which should conform to the hightest standards of the present day.  One very necessary feature would be to have arrangements for journalistic training in all of the Muslim languages.  If once such a school were to be established, journalistic progress could be achieved by leaps and bounds, because it would attract the very best of our young aspiring writers.  With proper directions, effort, orientation and dedication, it could soon assume the position of an international institute.  

         

A Story of Outstanding Success

Approximately 94,000 candidates from all over India sat for the preliminary test in the Civil Service examination for the year 1986-987. Of these, a mere ten thousand proved themselves fit to take the main examination, on the basis of which only seventeen hundred candidates were selected for interview. After this final screening process, the number of candidates chosen for high ranking national posts was whittled right down to 855.

The final results of these examinations were published in the national newspapers on June 8, 1987. After surmounting the various hurdles in the rigorous series of high level, nation-wide examinations, the man who finally topped the list was one Amir Subhani – a Muslim. This event in itself is quite adequate proof that there is no dearth of opportunities for Indian Muslims to prove their mettle and to be outstanding successes. Their way is not barred, as is so often alleged, by prejudice or partiality.

Muslims constitute approximately 12% of this country’s total population. In strict ratio, Muslims should have numbered at least 100 out of 855 who were finally selected for senior postings, but, in the final list there were only eleven. The idea generally prevalent among Muslims is that this scanty representation is the result of prejudice, but a closer scrutiny of the procedures of Civil Services Examinations shows that there is really no justification for this claim.

To begin with, the answer papers in the Civil Service written examination do not bear the candidate’s names, but only code-numbers. In this way, the examiner has no means of knowing to which community the candidates belong. After the written examination, an interview is conducted by a special board of five to seven members, each of whom is expert in his or her own field. It if were true that these members were bigoted in their outlook, then surely no Muslim would ever be selected at all for the IAS, let alone be allowed to go ahead and bag the top place. Even supposing there were some slight degree of prejudice in the examiner’s minds, this would not be deciding factor in the selecting process.

This is thanks to the system of allotting 1800 marks to the written examination and only 250 to the interview. This weightage rules out any foul play. Even if a candidate is unfairly treated at the interview, he still stands an excellent chance of being selected if he has had good marks in the written examination, because it is the aggregate that counts. No candidate is ever selected or rejected solely on the basis of the interview.

It is heartening to know that while Amir Subhani’s marks in the written examination only came to 64%, in the interview he managed to obtain 74% - a clear 10% improvement on his showing in the written examination.

When asked how he had prepared for the civil Service examinations, Amir Subhani said that, for six months prior to the examination, he had studied for twelve to fourteen hours a day. Even before this, he had been in the habit of studying up till midnight. Another important point he made was that he had done extensive extra-curricular reading of books, periodicals ad newspapers, as well as concentrating on the required reading for his course.

If Amir subhani had an outstanding success it was entirely due to the extraordinary amount of effort that he put into his work. In every examination that he had sat right throughout his life, from his matriculation right up to MA, it was always his own strenuous efforts which had secured him high marks. When he was asked what advice he would give to potential IAS candidates, he said that on the basis of his own experience, the best thing to do was ‘work hard and never give up in your struggle to achieve your goal.’

There are two arenas in which Indian Muslims are capable of working. One is that of demands and protests. The other is that of hard work and conscientious striving. While Muslim leaders have chosen the first arena, sterling individuals such as Amir Subhani have chosen the second.

Over the last half-century, Muslim leaders have seen fit to follow a policy of confrontation. Blaming others for all their difficulties, they have embarked on an unending protest campaign. People like Amir Subhani, however, have not in the meanwhile wasted their time in pointing the finger of accusation at others. Instead, they have set themselves to constant hard work in order to improve their positions, neglecting no opportunity which should happen to come their way.

This latter method has proved by far the most successful. While the policy adopted by Muslim leaders had failed to produce any positive results, those who have striven in the manner of Amir Subhani have gone from strength to strength. Their efforts have never gone to waste. Sooner or later they have borne fruit. Sooner or later they have led to success.

Which approach then should Muslims adopt? Clearly, they should follow the trail blazed by Amir Subhani, for such is the path which will lead them to success. The path which their leaders are so anxious to show them should be shunned absolutely, for it is a path that will lead them nowhere.

Model Minority : The Asian American Example

No Reaction

They discovered very early in their careers that the solution to their problem lay in shouldering the entire responsibility for their own destinies, and refusing to react even in the face of severe provocation. Living ordered lives, at peace with their neighbors; they were able to find the time, energy and mental balance to work much harder than others. Not only did this solve their own problems, but it brought an unexpected benefit to American society – a new competitive atmosphere. American youngsters, who had slipped into idle ways because they had become over-complacent about the future, now found that if they were even to survive; they would have to work as hard as the Asian Americans. American intellectuals have been quick to acknowledge that this jolt given to their society has been healthy in its effect.

According to Span (December 1987) a middle aged man from New York said: ‘Thank God for the Asians. They’re bringing back standards to our schools (p. 32).’

The work ethic, which used to be considered a western concept, has now become the special preserve of the Asians. Young Americans are now being admonished to conform to ‘Asian work ethics’ if they wish to be successful in their careers. This notion would appear to be borne out by the fact that whenever Asian immigrants have had to compete with the general run of Americans, they have proved to be the better qualified. As such, their presence has acted as a spur to young Americans to work harder. It is no doubt a sobering thought that Asians, in one generation, have achieved what it has taken others three generations to accomplish.

Analysing the distinctive performance of Asians in the US, New York’s University President is reported by Span to have said, ‘when I look at our Asian-American students I am certain that much of their success is due to Confucianism.’ Certainly, Americans have reasoned that people who have begun to project such a high economic and intellectual profile within a relatively short period of time must have very special qualities of character to be able to do so, and this, in turn, has commanded a great deal of respect for what has developed those qualities, this is to say, the religion and culture of the eastern Asian countries.

If Confucianism can have such a salutary effect upon eastern Asians, why cant Islam lead Indian Muslims to even greater heights of achievement? After all, the Qur’an and Hadith lay similar stress upon hard work and self-sufficiency. Prophet once refused to give a poor man alms, and instead gave him a practical lesson in how to fend for himself. He enquired about him and  said since he owned only one sheet and one drinking vessel, he should sell the drinking vessel and buy himself an axe-head with the proceeds. The man dutifully brought the axe-head to the Prophet, who fitted a shaft on it himself. The Prophet then advised him to go and hew wood and sell it. In a few days time, the man came back to him, rejoicing that he now had much more money that his cup had fetched him. The Prophet also admonished his companions never to ask help of others. He preached strict independence, and never encouraged anyone to become a burden upon society. For example, he said that even if one’s whip fell down from the saddle, one should dismount from one’s horse in order to pick it up, rather than ask anyone to hand it up to one. These are very simple examples, but they do illustrate the spirit which the Prophet tried to inculcate in his followers.

 

One might well ask what has happened to this spirit in modern times. It appears to have become submerged and forgotten in the kind of national and communal dispute which is constantly being provoked by shallow-minded leaders, who are more interested in their own popularity than in actual human uplift. If disputants could forget superficial differences and culminate avoidable friction, they would set themselves intellectually free to pursue a more constructive line of action. Simply by basing their lives upon the eternal principles of Islam, they would be able to find the means to bring about a new revolution in this country. In this manner, Muslims would not only solve their own problems but would give to this country a new standard which in time would come to be known as ‘the Muslim work ethic.’ Only when this happens, will Muslims establish themselves as an asset to this country, instead of the liability which they now are.

In order to re-integrate their cultural identity, Muslims have set themselves to launching one demand movement after another. To me, all such efforts are futile, because all cultural identity is something which cannot be achieved by just making demands. It is something which is generated by internal strength, something which makes its impact through the sum total intrinsic human qualities.

What Muslims should, more appropriately, aim at is a moral identity. Whatever distinction they hope to achieve should come from the willing, and conscious adoption of Islamic ethics. Once they have established their moral identity, their long sought-after cultural identity will, of itself, re-assert itself. This will come about quite independently of the demand movements which are so fruitlessly being launched at the present time. Then Span’s evaluation of the Asian presence in America – ‘Their presence is going to be a great blessing for society’ – may with justice be applied also to the Indian Muslims of today.

Model Minority : The Asian American Example

The problem of the minorities is one of the most vexed questions confronting India today. A great deal of administrative machinery has already been geared to the tackling of this issue and a whole spate of letters and articles, well-intentioned and otherwise, have appeared in the media, without, however, any neat, concrete solution having been found. But have we looked at the problem from all possible angles. A glimpse at what is happening in other countries with minority problems would indicate that there is one line of action which has been almost totally neglected in India – that of self-help.

It is positively heartening to see what this has done for minorities elsewhere in the world. Let us never forget that India does not stand alone in having such a problem. In the US, for example, the Asians settled there account for 2 per cent of the total population, but their success rate goes far and beyond their population ratio.  It is true that the US, has provided them with opportunities which are available in very few other countries in the world, but it would be far from correct to say that it had solved the minorities’ problems for them. Without the sustained personal efforts of the Asians themselves, success stories would have been few and far between. It is important to understand that it was this resolution and tenacity of purpose which brought them to the

fore and not the ‘demand-and-protest’ formula so beloved of the minorities in India particularly the Muslims. America’s Asian minority should serve a model for the minorities of India.  Their problems have equaled those of the Indian minorities in severity, but they have had the sense to open their eyes to the advantages all around them and to exploit them to the full.  It is unfortunate that there are many people in this world who cannot or will not recognize an opportunity when it comes their way. As an English poet has observed :

Two men looked out from prison bars,

One saw the mud and the other saw stars.

If a class or community which considers itself disadvantaged or deprived goes through life seeing only the mud and never the stars, there is little hope of its making progress, with or without external encouragement. Considering that India’s minorities seem to have spent a very long time concentrating their attention on the mud and doing very little reaching for the stars, they would do well to reflect that America’s Asian minorities did not start off in any better a situation than the find themselves in today, and certainly had no ready-made sinecures ready and waiting for them.  They had to start from scratch in an alien environment, cut off from their roots and traditions. They had to ignore disadvantages, create their own advantages and then learn to exploit them. India’s minorities, in sharp contrast to this, are living in their own land, in their own homes, with the support of centuries of tradition and culture behind them. Then what exactly are they waiting for?

The majority of the emigrants from Asian countries who have settled in America – the Asian Americans – belonged originally to China, Korea, Indo-China, etc., and when they first came to America, they could hardly converse in English at all, but, today, they are known as ‘super students’ in the best of America’s English Schools. Although they make up only 2 per cent of the population, they have secured 20 percent of the places in American institutes of higher learning.

This state of affairs has given Americans much food for thought, and detailed surveys have been carried out to pinpoint the contributing factors. The results of this research have appeared in various publications such as Time magazine (31 August, 1987), Span (December 1987), Reader’s Digest (August 1987) and The Hindustan Times (New Delhi, 30 August, 1987).