FIJI TIMES PART 2: IT CONTRIBUTED TO FALL OF DEMOCRACY IN FIJI AS A BIASED MEDIA, SUPPORTING UNELECTED CHIEFS

 

THE FIJI TIMES 152^nd ANNIVERSARY – PART 2 of 4

HOW FT, WITH THE CHIEFS, CONTRIBUTED TO FALL OF DEMOCRACY IN FIJI AS A BIASED MEDIA.

Thakur Ranjit Singh

PROLOGUE - PART 2

This is SECOND PART of continuation of the four-part series  on the history of the Fiji Times (FT). This is from already published articles and my research of Master’s Thesis – a historical notoriety of a Fiji newspaper never told in this manner and language.

DISCLAIMER: All reference to FT is to the foreign-owned paper before localisation in 2010. Hence I do not have any concerns with the locally - owned FT of 2021.

 

INTRODUCTION

In Part 1, we mentioned that The Fiji Times (FT) just marked  152^nd anniversary and were in Fiji prior to arrival of first Girmitiyas but remained blind to their plight and inhumane treatment. In fact they despised and hated them as smelly, dark-skinned invaders to Fiji and became cheerleaders and  mouthpiece of the British and Australian colonists and degraded these helpless and defenceless people.

Part 2 here will show that the leopard did not change spots, and after departure of the white men, they became towel boys and lapdogs of Eastern Chiefs, elite Itaukei and European and Gujarati businesses, and how they became a threat to Fiji’s democracy. As I have openly stated before, the greatest threat to democracy in Fiji came from the Great Council of Chiefs, followed by a partisan media. Please read that here…………..

 

Sitiveni Rabuka, the coup-maker of 1987, was soundly defeated by Chaudhry in 1999 election. He was having an affair with a key senior reporter of FT, Margaret Wise who was agitating a war with Chaudhry, unethically using FT, while management of FT allowed this rot to continue.

THE FIJI TIMES - PART 2 (OF 4)

 

Russell Hunter was refused an extension of his work permit by Chaudhry government which had a bitter running battle with the media in general and FT in particular. One notable incident was during the launch of the Fiji Media Council’s Code of Conduct where the Prime Minister Chaudhry was very critical of reporting standards and the attitude of FT towards his government and accused it of “fanning the fires of sedition and racism.” In his speech, Chaudhry had singled out one particular reporter, Margaret Wise – that, later.

In speaking about unnecessary and unwarranted coverage given to nationalist union leader Taniela Tabu, Chaudhry accused The Fiji Times of harbouring an agenda:

There have been a number of articles on Taniela Tabu breathing fire and brimstone along racial lines, making all kinds of threats and allegations not backed by facts. Yet The Fiji Times continues to pose this man whose own credibility is questionable, having frittered away $4 million of union membership funds that he can’t explain, as the saviour of the Fijian civil servants… none of the other media reported anything on his unwarranted ourbursts... It makes me wonder whether there is not a conspiracy at work here between that particular reporter and these anti-government elements?

 

Russell Hunter, Editor-in Chief of Fiji Times, during late 1990, and was denied visa and deported during the Peoples Coalition rule, but joined FT once Chaudhry was displaced as a result of political instability that, as my research shows, was partly contributed by the stance of a biased FT.

Media commentators Field, Baba and Nabobo-Baba shed additional light on the Wise story:

 

The Rupert Murdoch-owned Fiji Times decided, almost by default and as a result of one particular reporter that they were going to get rid of Chaudhry. Reporter Margaret Wise tore into Chaudhry with many an unsourced story which the paper had no qualms about publishing. What was known to the newspaper, but not shared with readers and now a matter of court record, was that she was also Rabuka’s lover and had a child by him.

It was Mahendra Chaudhry and his People’s Coalition Government that soundly walloped Rabuka and his SVT into oblivion. The unethical sexual relationship between FT’s political star reporter Margaret Wise and the person who was soundly beaten by Chaudhry, Sitiveni Rabuka was reported in FT. Michael Field (2010), in his Swimming with Sharks mentioned this:

Rabuka fathered a boy with [Margaret] Wise and then denied it was his. I was often in Fiji at the time, covering treason and mutiny trials. More than once I would run into Rabuka after Wise took him to court. ‘ A DNA test revealed Mr Rabuka  was 99.999 percent [certain] to be the likely father of the 18-month-old boy,’ the Fiji Times said.

The court found he was the father, and he was ordered to pay F$30 a week. (p.179)

Tin-Pot racist trade unionists and political party leaders, with questionable support and ethics were allowed space by certain reporters of FT to spew racial venom on Chaudhry's Peoples Coalition Government of the day, and management of FT allowed this partisan approach to flourish.

The ethical issue that arises here is that when she was reporting against the Chaudhry government, she was also having an affair with Rabuka. How would a multinational, Rupert Murdoch’s media allow such a conflict of interest to exist without any control, and with apparent knowledge, encouragement, and the blessings from FT management. Why did Alan Robinson and Russel Hunter allow this unethical media practice to flourish?

It is incidents and situations like this that gave rise to the term “skirt journalism” that raises ethical and conflict of interest issues.

Another researcher at USP was also critical of the newspaper which portrayed Speight as a crusader for the Fijian race, wresting back the power for the Fijian race for preservation of their future. She also named Margaret Wise, as one of FT reporters who wrote stories that were aimed at consolidating the myth that the takeover was an ethnic conflict and not provincial rivalry between the confederacies. Wise continued to run stories which kept on emphasising inter-ethnic conflict as the reason.

Sakiasi Butadroka, who helped displace Ratu Mara's Alliance Government was also used by ethno-nationalist politicians to destabilise Chaudry's Government, and FT allowed them enough space and publicity to do this.

Another researcher in her hypothesis proposed that:

The Fiji Times represented and reinforced the ruling class ideology in Fiji, a ruling class who were determined to consolidate political power by promoting the role of chiefly elite and thereby disguising the tension caused by class relations in society.

It also declared that the Speight crisis happened because Fijians did not trust an Indo Fijian Prime Minister to deliver security of Fijian rights and guarantee of Fijian leadership. She added that the editor of FT during the crisis was a Fijian (referred to as indigenous race). The view of the Fijian editor appeared to have been filtering in the newspapers. FT took it for granted that the Fijian chiefs had legitimacy to provide leadership role in a crisis situation, ignoring the Indo-Fijians in the process.

This concept of legitimising the role of non-elected and politically aligned chiefs over all the people of Fiji matches Herman and Chomsky’s (2008) Propaganda Model theory which stipulates that media is dependent on the elites and participates in propaganda campaigns helpful to elite interests. Research analysis showed the newspaper tended to support not only the business functions but also the ruling chiefly elite over that of the survival of democracy.

The racial slant of FT  supported democracy, as long as the Fijians and the GCC dominated leadership  and ruled Fiji. FT, while supporting democracy tended to favour Fijian self-interest over the political system and mandate of the people. The papers failed to support the huge mandate of the people for return of Chaudhry to power. This was a clear reflection of the racial skew of the papers’ editor and senior and influential journalists and their links to the ruling elite who supported Fijian leadership for Fiji.

A free and neutral media in a fledgling democracy, in a developing nation, with racial issues, need to exercise extra care to project itself as a neutral, impartial and balanced Fourth Estate. Unfortunately, as my research substantiates, the foreign-owned FT failed to live up to this expectation, while beating hollowed drums of success in Fiji for 152 years.
.

Criticism by Chaudhry and other researchers and authors concluded that:

……the FT editor failed to provide any in-depth analysis of the causes of the political crisis nor related it back to historical events. .… reinforced the colonial legacy that Fijian chiefs are the rightful rulers of Fiji, emphasising that Fiji, and this presumably means Fijians, was not ready for a multiracial constitution. 

The researcher was critical of the standard of the editorials and the paper’s understanding of the Constitution and their lack of understanding of the special protection accorded in the 1997 Constitution, the process of Constitutional change and the inability of any Prime Minister to be able to change things at their whim, hence the fact that an Indo-Fijian Prime Minister was not a situation that should agitate the Fijian public.

My continuing Part 3 will brief you on my research for AUT Thesis, which substantiated that a partisan, a biased FT contributed to fall of democracy in Fiji - an irony for a supposedly Fourth Estate to do so.

 

[About the Author: Thakur Ranjit Singh is former publisher of now closed, partly government-owned Daily Post newspaper, a journalist,  a media commentator,  a community worker in Auckland and runs his blog FIJI PUNDIT. He did a research on the role of the Fiji Times in contributing to destabilising of democracy by a partisan  newspaper that culminated in Speight’s attempted coup in 2000. Details in the articles are largely from his Masters in Communication (MCS) thesis at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in 2011, and from already published materials. E-mail:thakurjifj@gmail.com.]

FIJI TIMES PART 1: IT DESPISED INDIANS AND SHAMED MEDIA AS A LAPDOG OF THE ELITES

 

THE FIJI TIMES 152nd ANNIVERSARY – PART 1

WHEN FT DESPISED INDIANS AND SHAMED MEDIA AS  A LAP DOG OF WHITE COLONISTS & ELITES

Thakur Ranjit Singh

PROLOGUE - PART 1

This is a four-part series of articles on the history of the Fiji Times, from already published articles and my research as Master’s Thesis, and never told in this manner and language.

The Fiji Times (hereafter referred to as “FT”) just made a big noise and celebrations about its 152 years in Fiji and praised and commended itself for its achievements. 

Many, especially Fiji-Indians in Fiji and around the world (Diaspora) may have also clapped but failed to know what FT failed to tell and do as the oldest Fourth Estate in Fiji, which for the most part, despised Indians.

Those who studied journalism and seen research on FT would know how it shamed journalism, the Fourth Estate, as the media is referred to. The Government comprises three arms: executive, legislative and judiciary . These three arms of government do everything necessary to maintain law and order in the state. 

And media is an additional important and responsible arm to keep a check on these three and therefore referred to as THE FOURTH STATE.

DISCLAIMER: All reference to FT is to the foreign-owned paper before localisation in 2010. Hence I do not have any concerns with the 2021 FT. If anything, the Fiji Times of today may be one of the media which stands tall as a respectable Fourth Estate and pride to journalism in Fiji in very trying times in 2021 where the three arms of the government appear to be all muddled up and muddied together.

 

INTRODUCTION

 

The Fiji Times just marked  152^nd anniversary as they came to Fiji in 1869, 10 years before arrival of first indentured Indian labourers (Girmitiyas) from India. Many atrocities, violence, injustice, breach of human rights and inhumane activities were imposed on these vulnerable illiterate people from India. Yet, the paper never exercised it role of the Fourth Estate or its responsibility of journalism to report facts neutrally, impartially, diligently, and fairly. If anything, they became mouthpiece of the British and Australian colonists and degraded these helpless and defenceless people.

What appears to be missing is for any children of Girmit to stand up and reveal all the ills of a White foreign media  that rarely stood up for their forebear Girmitiyas, and neither for them nor their children till early  21^st century. Hence FIJI PUNDIT chose to fill the vacuum, as a duty to my voiceless Girmitiyas who were never able to defend themselves.

It started for Girmitiyas in 1879, but the Fiji Times was in Fiji 10 years before, boasting to be there in 1869. Yet, they failed to exercise its role as a responsible media in most of its life in Fiji. And as my 4 part article series will show, their hatred for Indians culminated in contributing to removal of Chaudhry's "Indian Government" in 2000. Keep on reading the series.

Most of what I say are from already published materials and thesis, and largely come from my Master’s Thesis at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in 2011 , titled: “THE 2000 SPEIGHT COUP IN FIJI: THE ROLE OF “THE FIJI TIMES” LEADING TO POLITICAL INSTABILITY”. I will have link to this research at end of this article,  and you may access and have a look at it, and read one year’s FT news that have been photographed and used in the thesis, and be shocked to see how FT became a mouthpiece of ethno-nationalists, anti-Chaudhry and anti-Indian brigade .

THE FIJI TIMES - PART 1 (OF 4)

So, let’s begin. We begin by a research by  Padmini Gaunder at Auckland University in 2006. Through historical perspectives, she revealed how FT generated animosity and tension between the major ethnic groups, leading to ethnic conflict. She rightfully stated that FT was the only paper for over a century, and it used its position early to shove  a wedge between the races and appeared to represent the ruling class and the elites. She said:

This newspaper represented the views and interests of a small group of vested European commercial interests in the country and deliberately caused ethnic divisions by influencing the perceptions of indigenous Fijians towards the immigrant Indians. The newspaper helped to implant fear in the minds of the indigenous population of domination of the country by the immigrant community. This fear led to suspicions and slowly it caused tensions and finally ethnic conflict.

Gaunder states that the racial divisiveness of the newspaper appeared to have been founded in the history of FT:

The Fiji Times had started its anti-Indian propaganda in its very early days itself, during the indenture period in the colony (1879-1920).Throughout the indenture period, there was often violence in the cane fields, resulting sometimes in murders of the overseer by the labourers. The Fiji Times invariably described these incidents as cold-blooded murder and depicted the Indians as a mysterious race of criminals to whom violence came naturally.

The voiceless vulnerable Girmitiyas who never had anyone to protect them from ruthlessness of the White men, and even the White Media, Fiji Times. Instead of being a neutral and impartial reporter, it became a bosom-buddy and mouthpiece of the colonists and the elite white settlers.

In fact what FT failed to mention and conveniently omitted was that in most cases, the violence was provoked by the overseers, and this may be verified by anecdotal oral (verbal) literature from our Girmitiyas who told us tales of such injustices, brutalities, and violence. This is well documented in Rajendra Prasad’s TEARS IN PARADISE.

Tears in Paradise – Suffering and Struggles of Indians in Fiji 1879-2004 reveals the horrific treatment of Indian indentured workers (Girmitiyas) in Fiji by the British from 1879-1919. Indenture system (Girmit) under which they were recruited was slavery by another name. Working and living conditions were so atrocious that Fiji had the highest rate of suicide in the world and highest rate of infanticide among the colonies that deployed indentured labour. Yet none of these made it to the pages of FT because of their selective and racist journalism, which tarnished Fiji Indians as smelly, dark-skinned invaders.

Until 1920, the white settlers regarded Indian and Fijians (Fijians refer to Itaukei) as dark-skinned people who were inferior to white settlers. It was only after 1920 and 1921 strikes by Indians that they befriended the Itaukei and started turning them against the Indians.

The Fiji Times became their main tool for conveying this pro-Fijian/anti-Indian stand. It deliberately disseminated, through headlines, news stories, letters to the editor and editorials news about Indians that would cause unease in the minds of the Fijians.

Pundit Tej Ram Prem of Sydney enacting a suicide scene at a Girmit play. Fiji had the highest rate of suicide in the world and highest rate of infanticide among the colonies that deployed indentured labour. Yet none of these made it to the pages of FT because of their selective and racist journalism, which tarnished Fiji Indians as smelly, dark-skinned invaders.

A historian and acknowledged author on early Indian history in Fiji, Dr. K. L Gillion noted similar racial slurs in FT of those early years against Fiji Indians. Citing an incident in 1922 when an Indian deputation was visiting Fiji, the following letter appeared in the then Fiji Times and Herald of 1 March 1922:

I would say that 99 per cent of the Europeans in Fiji and the Fijians are loyalists and the handing over of Fiji to evil-smelling, treacherous, non-educated, garlic-eating Indians would be one of the greatest crimes in the history of the British Empire and an event which would possibly meet with some opposition.

Gillion (1977) also recorded instances when the newspaper called for deportation of Indian leaders to India, used derogatory words against Indians, was accused of reinforcing “apprehension about Asian penetration of the South Pacific”  and expressed contempt on celebrating jubilee, in 1929, of the arrival of the first Indian settlers and declaring of 15 May as a public holiday. (Even Frank Bainimarama and Fiji First Government is struggling with request of Fiji Girmit Foundation NZ of 2015 to declare Girmit Public Holiday, almost a century after when FT initially opposed it. It seems we have progressed very little, and still waiting for that to become a reality.)

In the issue of January 29, 1929, The Fiji Times and Herald wrote:

Fiji does not require permanent settlers of the Indian type. Her lands, her climate are for Europeans who can employ what labour they require. 

Poor helpless Indian Girmitiyas (indentured labourers) in Fiji were despised by FT through their selective and racist journalism, which tarnished Fiji Indians as smelly, dark-skinned, garlic-eating invaders.

These set tones of racial slant of FT. Things do not appear to have changed in some fourteen decades of its presence in Fiji. The newspaper was established in Fiji in 1869 – exactly ten years before the arrival of the first Indian indentured labourers from India.  These helpless labourers went through grave brutalities and violence at the hands of British and Australian overseers, including the breach of basic human rights, and flouting of international laws that took place under the nose of a supposedly free press. 

However, FT never appeared to have taken a stand on the injustices meted out to these labourers. There have been unreported cases about bullying, filthy plantation lines (accommodation) where labourers were penned like animals, people broken by diseases, the beatings, and the use of law to subjugate these people:

..…the rough young Australian overseers… used the Indian women…the system of European dominance… the law courts unconsciously favoured the articulate employer against the bewildered or ignorant labourer…the Indians remembered the deceit, the slave-driving drudgery, and the degradation and vice; the CSR, the planters, and Europeans generally saw the Indians as coloured labour force to be kept under.

All this happened under the watch of FT which not only remained silent and uncritical of the elite, but in fact, became their mouthpiece. 

As media theory of propaganda Model of Media suggests, the media depends on the elite, remains uncritical of them and in fact participates in propaganda campaigns helpful to elite interests, who in the old Fiji represented  the Colonial Sugar Refining Company (CSR), the Europeans and the British government. 

Things did not seem to have changed as studies suggests the elites subsequent to Fiji independence in 1970 changed to the Eastern (Lauan) Chiefs, the elite Itaukei, and the rich business (mostly Gujarati) community.

Read in the other three parts how Fiji Times  since Independence in 1970 became mouthpiece of the Chiefs,(read Ratu Mara) elite Itaukei, Lauan Chiefs and rich businesses. My second part, together with Parts 3 and 4, will reveal the truth in the adage that leopards do not change colour and tells of the FT post-independence and how it contributed to destabilising of democracy in Fiji , culminating in removal of Chaudhry’s Peoples Coalition government in May 2000.

[About the Author: Thakur Ranjit Singh is former publisher of now closed, partly government-owned Daily Post newspaper, a journalist, a media commentator, a community worker in Auckland and runs his blog FIJI PUNDIT. He did a research as part of Masters in Communication (MCS) thesis at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in 2011. This was on the role of the Fiji Times in contributing to destabilising of democracy by a partisan  media that culminated in Speight’s attempted coup in 2000. Details in the articles are largely from his thesis titled: THE 2000 SPEIGHT COUP IN FIJI: THE ROLE OF THE FIJI TIMES LEADING TO POLITICAL INSTABILITY.

E-mail:thakurjifj@gmail.com.]

Link to thesis: https://openrepository.aut.ac.nz/handle/10292/2554

 

 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

MASSEY UNIVERSITY BARKING UP THE WRONG TREE, SEEKING TERRORISTS AMONGS HINDUS

 

 

MASSEY UNIVERSITY CHALLENGED FOR SPREADING HINDU-

HATE UNDER COVER OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM

Thakur Ranjit Singh

 

In my earlier article, you read about my letter of concerns about Hinduphobia at Massey University. In this article you will get a synopsis of their reply and my retort to their spin.

Perhaps what confuses us is that Massey University is seeking terrorist and those  spreading hate in the wrong places. They wold have found them if they had looked at solving mystery of who brought down twin towers in New York, who caused massacre at the Taj Hotel in Mumbai, India, and who are causing human tragedy in Afghanistan.

 

In fact they are seeking terrorist at wrong places. If the academics supporting conference of dismantling Hindutva looked at the real hideout of international terrorist, many of the mysteries intriguing world leaders on terrorism would have been solved by now. 

Unfortunately CARE and Massey University are barking up the wrong tree in search for terrorists.

 

Please read on………….

 

CARE and Massey University have not tried to seek terrorists in Saudi Arabia, Israel, Pakistan and Afghanistan. They are seeking them in the wrong place and wrong ideology of a peaceful India, Hinduism and Hindutva which treats the whole world as one big family.

 

CARE and Massey University have not tried to seek terrorists in Saudi Arabia, Israel, Pakistan and Afghanistan. They are seeking them in the wrong place and wrong ideology of a peaceful India, Hinduism and Hindutva which treats the whole world as one big family.

As I write this second blog, I wish to bring this anti-Hindu CARE arm of Massey University under into spotlight.

 

 I wish to ask Massey University through this public forum:

 

1.   The total annual budget of CARE for the last 5 years

 

2.   Names of Foreign Donors for last 5 years

 

3.   Amount of Foreign donations above ten thousand dollar ($10,000)

 

4.   Remuneration paid to Mr Mohan Dutta for work related to CARE

 

5.   Names of Countries visited by Mr Dutta to carry out his CARE work since his appointment.

 

6.   Number of papers prepared and presented by Professor Dutta related to Hindus, Hindutva, Hinduism and Islamophobia

 

 

Mystery still surrounds the real brains behind 9/11 terrorism that resulted in the fall of the twin towers. Massey University needs to start looking for hate and terrorism at the right places - and that is not in India, Hinduism or Hindutva.

I had written to Massey University, expressing concerns at the stance of Massey University in allowing Hindumisia/Hinduphobia or Hindu hate, disguised as academic freedom under Massey University’s CARE (Centre for Cultural -centered Approach to Research and Evaluation).

 

This article provides further development in this fight for our religion.

 

In their reply, among others they said the following in a standard letter they wrote to other critics as well:

 

1)    CARE was taking care of Islamophobia by Hindu organisations in NZ to measure hate.

 

2)   Seventy universities supported Massey to measure Muslim hate by Hindu organisations, and they supported a conference.

 

3)   More 700 academics around the world wrote in support of conference to dismantle Hindutva, which they claim is different from Hinduism.

 

4)   This conference was supposed to reveal to the world terrorism and hate spread by Hindus

 

5)   Massey supports academic freedom, advancement of knowledge, discussion of diverse viewpoints and encourages independent thinking.

 

Terrorism and bombing of the Taj Hotel in Mumbai was from a terrorist cell based in Pakistan. Wonder why Massey University are seeking them in India and Hinduism.

I wrote to Massey University on 16 September 2021, retorting to their claims contained in their letter, summarised above.

 

Dear Professor Stephen Kelly,

 

Thanks for your reply of the 13^th instant. I will not accuse you of being ignorant or not knowing how to respond to diverse individual concerns.

 

This is because your office dishes out your communications school’s standard marketing manual and spin to all those who have written to you raising different issues on CARE in general, and Professor Dutta in particular.

 

Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde faces of CARE at Massey University. They are advertised as a communication research that uses culture to promote communication. But in actual fact they have become hub of Hinduphobia,  spreading hate. India has never invaded any country and it embraces all as equal in a secular India. Yet, Massey University has targeted India and Hinduism as a place promoting hate and terrorism.

However, as an Alumnus, I wish to raise grave concerns about degeneration of my former institution, where now the safety and fair treatment of Hindu students become debatable with Massey University openly supporting and encouraging Hindu-hate sentiments. 

In addition, you seem to be populated with so many of your academics carrying Hindumisia /Hinduphobia mindsets, and hence their academic impartiality, neutrality and fairness become questionable and dubious. It therefore raises doubts about credibility of your institution continuing to remain a trusted international institution.

 

I am saddened that standards at Massey appear to have deteriorated since I was there some four decades ago, and it appears to have become a mercenary institution, supporting those who pay you the highest price.

If this was not so, why some 700 leading academics, as you claim, especially from USA and many with Indian origin, are only concerned about issues with Hindu, Hindutva, anti-Modi, and anti-Indian sentiments, while there are bigger human rights issue affecting mankind in the world now?

Please explain, since when has Massey University usurped and hijacked the objectives and roles of Oxfam and Amnesty International?

 

For your information, the letter I wrote was developed into an article for FIJI PUNDIT blog which I run , and widely circulated, even to NZ government Ministers. In the illustrations used, I specifically asked for each Kiwi Hindu activity, where are there any signs of promoting divisions, terrorism, or religious violence we are accused of undertaking.

These , sadly, have been maliciously, falsely, and sacrilegiously claimed by your Dutta, who you are providing unqualified support under garb of academic freedom to create divisions within Hindus and Muslims in NZ. Sadly, and unfortunately, it already seems to have started working, seeing at least one Kiwi Muslim signatory from Waikato, supporting Dutta and CARE.

 

Here is that link to my article of concerns:

https://fijipundit.blogspot.com/2021/09/former-student-writes-to-massey.html

 

Your spin-doctors failed to answer issues that I have raised as a Kiwi Fiji Indian Hindu, who has been tarnished by Professor Dutta who compares Hindus from Fiji and Kiwi born Hindus to a political system in India and says Hindu rituals lead to violence, and therefore, funding agencies need not support us here.

 

Mohan J Dutta - the person in charge of CARE, spreading hate. Massey University is requested to provide his remuneration in CARE, overseas funding for CARE, names of large foreign donors supporting CARE, countries he visited in last five years for CARE activities and papers he presented on Hinduism, Hindutva and Islamophobia. 

Instead of emergence of any rethink or consciousness , you merely dish out the standard circular and spins to all your critics, supporting CARE, most probably authored by Dutta and like-minded academics in CARE - who do not seem to really care.

 

Perhaps you will care (pun intended) to answer why your 700 academic supporters did not raise other grave human rights abuses and concerns around the world, which among others, include:

1)   Rise of Islamic terrorism around the world and use of Madrassas as teaching ground of hatred and fundamentalism.

 

2)   What happened to the missing Hindus in Pakistan, who during partition were 10% but now are only 2% of the population?

3)   Why have no issues on human rights abuses been raised, among others, in Philippines shooting criminals, Muslim persecution in China, Rohingya Muslim treatment in Myanmar, human rights abuse of indigenous people of West Papua, and treatment of Muslim women in Afghanistan? If Massey University wishes to be measuring barometer, judge and police for such abuses, why ONLY INDIA AND HINDUS?

 

4)   Repeating - why particular interest only in India and Hindus? Are university’s overseas funding specifically targeted for degrading us?

 

While Massey University has its radar on Hindus in India, it completely and selectively neglected to seek violence, terror and hate in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and other countries known as hub of international terrorism.

5)   Should not Massey University develop a fairer conscience to raise voices against greater human atrocities than reportedly  done in India, where Muslims have a choice to freely go to Islamic nations of Pakistan and Bangladesh (formerly West Pakistan ), which were specially separated from India for religious segregation, but they chose to stay back? Don’t they still have a choice?

I am not sure what your spin-machine will produce now, but I am not sitting idle in this case and copying this to relevant politicians and Ministers, and will also report Massey University to Human Rights Commission, for breaching our human rights, belittling us and our beliefs by targeting India and Hindus but ignoring greater concerns elsewhere. My bewilderment still remains - WHY ONLY INDIA AND HINDUS? 

Terrorism at Taj Hotel in Mumbai - should not Dutta, a Professor  from India, use CARE to probe the real source of terrorism in India rather than having a sham at Massey University to blame Hinduism and Hindutva for violence and hate? The terrorism at Taj was from Pakistan.

Perhaps you may pass this to Professor Dutta for a more relevant response to particular individual issues raised, than going through your public relation (PR) and spin machine.

Awaiting targeted and relevant responsive answers to issues raised in this letter written with a heavy heart by a humiliated and shamed Alumnus of Massey University.

Regards and best wishes,

 

Thakur Ranjit Singh

 

Blogger-FIJI PUNDIT

Ranjit Singh - Massey Alumnus -1984

Kiwi Fiji Indian Hindu

 

[About the Author: Thakur Ranjit is a Third Generation Fiji Indian Hindu, now settled in NZ. He is an Alumni of Massey University from Class of 1984, a journalist, a media commentator, and runs his blog FIJI PUNDIT. E-mail:thakurjifj@gmail.com]

FORMER STUDENT WRITES TO MASSEY UNIVERSITY AGAINST ANTI-HINDU PROPAGANDA

 

FORMER MASSEY UNI STUDENT RAISES VOICE AGAINST  HINDUPHOBIA.

A LETTER TO THE VICE CHANCELLOR OF MASSEY UNIVERSITY

Thakur Ranjit Singh

Dear Vice Chancellor, 

I am writing as an Alumnus of Massey University from School of 1984 and also as a Third Generation Girmitiya (Indentured labourer) descendant, as I am extremely disappointed that name of my former institution has been smeared.

I am deeply hurt that my former institution appears to have degenerated so low as to allow itself to be made into an international Hinduphobia hub by overseas, mostly American, Institutions. I refer to the white paper authored by Prof. Mohan Dutta as part of the CARE White Paper Series published by Massey University and has already been brought to your attention. 

Hindi School Students perform the arts of music and culture they learnt during Waitakere Diwali. How is this Hindu Arts and Culture threat to anybody?

And I also refer to a support letter endorsed by over 100 like-minded academics from around the world, where his role in his involvement with anti-India, anti- Modi, anti-Hindu and Hinduphobia, to any sensible academic, obviously is ultra vires to his responsibilities and role as head of CARE.

Please note this is being written in an individual capacity and represents my personal views only, and not any organisation I am associated with.

I also speak for many descendants of indentured labourers to Fiji here in New Zealand, who comprise almost half the “Indian” population here. We need to appreciate that over 85 percent of Fiji Indians are Hindus, and I join our Hindu brothers to strongly oppose and denounce statements contained in the fallacious, defamatory, and sacrilegious White paper. His biggest crime is that he has also tarnished Fiji -Born Hindus with the same brush, strangely, being ignorant of our history.

Graceful dancers very beautifully express their lessons of dancing culture. This is gift of Hinduism to the world. So how can this be deemed threat to anybody.

When Girmit or indenture to Fiji commenced in 1879 and ended in 1916, we then had a united secular India, so had no separate East or West Pakistan/ Bangladesh. 

Thakur Bansi and Barkat Ali as Girmitiyas (indentured labourers) were all INDIANS,  when they came to Fiji as Jahaji Bhais (travelling companions in one ship). Their shared misery on the Indenture ships bound them into inseparable friendship called “Jahaji Bhai”. 

They celebrated Diwali and Eid together, everybody in the villages were uncle and aunties, with no animosity and radicalisation, which began after partition of India and influence of certain Islamic scholars of questionable ideology from Middle East and other such nations into Fiji, NZ, and other western countries, teaching division between religion. Professor Dutta is doing exactly the same, in garb of an academic.

Since its inception in 2015, Shri Ram Mandir in Henderson, Auckland has been a hub of religious and community centre and activity. It supports religious discourse, Senior Citizens, promotes networking of youths and ladies, involves in fundraising for much needed community support and helps the vulnerable. So, who in their right sense can deem Hinduism as threat to anybody? In fact they have been praised for adding value to NZ.

Therefore, many Fiji Indians in NZ or Fiji  have hardly heard of term Islamophobia until the terrorism at Christchurch Mosque by an Anglo Saxon Australian. And Hinduism and Hindutva for them is peaceful following of the principles of their religion , scriptures, Vedas, to love all in the principle of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, which regards the whole world as one family.

Therefore Fiji Indian Hindus, who comprise some half of Hindus here in Aotearoa, are very hurt by Professor Dutta, smearing Fiji Hindus with his divisive views. And in effect he, supposedly being a Hindu, commits sacrilege against his forebears and brethren by referring to us as spreading terror and persecuting fellow Muslims in NZ.

Well-trained young girls performing eye-catching classical dance at Trusts Stadium during Diwali Celebrations. What threat to the society can be seen from promotion of such arts and culture from Hinduism?

The terror attack by a lone wolf terrorist in Christchurch on 25 March 2019 came as a complete surprise in a peaceful Aotearoa. This was not from a Hindu, but a White Supremacist from Australia.

There have been many subsequent anti-Islamic and Islamophobic statements and actions. They were not from Hindus but White Supremacists. This can be verified from FIANZ (Federation of Islamic Associations of NZ) , and Islamic women’s association in NZ. (Anjum Rahman of the women's wing in Waikato, apparently and ironically appears to support Massey University, Mohan Dutta and hence their anti-Hindu sentiments in NZ.)

Hinduism is the second largest religion in New Zealand with over 200,000 followers, after Christianity. In some 100 years since they have been here, Hindus have never ever been mentioned in any activity of terror or hurt to others that would bring shame to the religion. In effect they have always been praised for helping NZ and adding colour and diversity to the cultural landscape and economy of New Zealand. A recent study shows Indians add some $10 b to NZ’s economy, and the sizable portion of that is by Hindus.

Therefore it came as surprise when, Professor Dutta, tasked to look after a school of health well-being of people, indulges in Hinduphobia - spreading hate in Aotearoa under cover of Academic Freedom.

A thrilling Waitakere Holi at Trusts Stadium in Henderson where some 40 per cent of those participating are Anglo-Saxons and non-Hindus, enjoying the all-encompassing Hindu festival of colours. Now, where does any Professor see that as a threat to anybody? Can anybody smell any hate of anybody from any of these Hindu activities in NZ?

In the aftermath of as ISIS terror attack by an Islamic terrorist in Auckland on 4 September 2021, it was revealed that such a person should have been deported but was allowed to stay in NZ because of NZ laws being very timid and soft of such criminal elements.

This also appears to be the case with laws on Academic Freedom and hate speech, where Massey University appears to be used by some anti-India and anti-Modi sentiments as a hub to spread hate, anti-Hindu, and anti-Modi statements , sheltering under cloak of academic freedom. As stated above, a letter has come to attention, supported by over 100 USA and overseas, mostly Indian academics, lending support to spread of hate and misinformation by Dutta in a picturesque Palmerston North.  (Anjum Rahman, a founding member of the New Zealand Islamic Women's Council, is also a sanatory to that letter).

Dutta mischievously and maliciously misrepresents Hindu community of Aotearoa by hinting that we are trained to commit violence against other religions and are brainwashed to become Hindu supremacist. His assertion that Hindu art and cultural elements promote Islamophobia is laughable if it was not that nonsensical and ill-informed coming from a person who is supposed to be a Professor.

When has celebration of enlightening Diwali festival of lights, chanting of Gayatri Mantra, celebrating colourful Holi, participating in Yoga, singing ..eeshwar Allah tero naam…, teaching dance, music, arts, and language ever killed, hurt, or persecuted anybody at all, least of all Muslims, who also participate happily in our colourful all-inclusive festivals and events?

I am perturbed  as to why Professor Dutta took a political belief  practised by the ruling party in India and set it against some three percent population of Hindu population here who call Aotearoa home. 

The teachings of arts, language, music and culture from Waitakere Hindi School culminates in these colourful students going on stage to display their proud and generous learnings throbbing from Hinduism. Is that seen as a danger or threat to anybody? If anything, it beautifies cultural landscape of Aotearoa. 

Hindus in NZ also come from the Indian subcontinent, Fiji, Nepal, Singapore, South Africa, the Caribbean and other nations. Many of them are second and third generation Kiwi Hindus. I am surprised why Massey University allows them to be involved in such a political philosophy as in India. This really bring into question the reputation and credibility of Massey University where I was almost four decades ago.

I therefore request Massey University to look at performance, agitation and actions of Professor Dutta which are obviously ultra vires to his academic role as head of CARE of Massey University.

Awaiting for your effective action.

 

 

Your Faithfully,

 

Thakur Ranjit Singh

 

Blogger-FIJI PUNDIT

Massey Alumni (1984)

Kiwi Fiji Indian Hindu

+6421 235 4559

 

[About the Author: Thakur Ranjit is a Third Generation Fiji Indian Hindu, now settled in NZ. He is an Alumni of Massey University from Class of 1984, a journalist, a media commentator, and runs his blog FIJI PUNDIT. Email: thakurjifj@gmail.com]