Thread by @HumanistsInt

Our event with @ConwayHall on #FundamentalismRising beginning now. President @andrewcopson introducing Salil Tripathi with @pen_int Writers In Prison Committee and @BonyaAhmed.

Salil discusses attacks on rationalists in India (more on that here:
humanists.international/2017/03/ration…) He notes that we don't know who committed these crimes, but we can look at who celebrates these attacks, and the wider political support for the fundamentalism that underlies them.

Salil explains how under PM Modi, anti-science, pseduo-historical sentiments linked to Hindu nationalism have flourished, including fake medicine.

"Many people will tell you that this is the fringe of Indian politics," concludes Salil. "But sometimes the fringe becomes the centre."

.@BonyaAhmed explains how she and her late husband were attacked and he was killed, over writings on science and homosexuality. (More on that attack: humanists.international/2015/02/humani…)

We must look at the wider context for religious fundamentalism, says Bonya. A fundamentalism of white nationalism is also on the rise globally. In Bangladesh the rise of Islamism has been a long-term political project.

The supposedly secular government is openly in bed with fundamentalists, says Bonya, receiving colossal foreign funding to build new mosques. The prime minister has found that fundamentalism is a political tool.

Bonya outlines how demands of fundamentalists have crept in, including poets and writers deemed contrary to religion in some way being removed from school text books, and recent changes to the Child Marriage Act which effectively removed age limits.

Meanwhile the campaign against atheists was unfolding, with extremists claiming they would kill an atheist blogger per month. Several writers, activists and publishers were murdered, and government often just victim-blames the writers for 'hurting religious sentiments'.

The new digital security act is even more problematic than the previous law under which atheist blogger were arrested. So religious fundamentalism is a problem; so is the politics and social norms which interact with and enable it.

Andrew asks how the 2 countires compare, noting people often describe Awami as "sliding into" fundamentalism while BJP is characterized as "already" that way. Salil agrees the clichés are there but dig deeper and e.g. there have long been alliances with the radical groups.

Bonya thinks the histories are importantly different. Religion in Bangladesh was there, but was syncretic, not a direct import from Middle East. That's why she describes the trend now as a political project: we face active attempts to transmit Saudi-style Salafism to Bangladesh.

Salil adds that there has been a similar drive in India that's been described as a push to Abrahamicize Hinduism: one big, one main book, etc. It's led to a kind of "competitive intolerance": if Muslims get angry about X then we should get angry about Y!

Bonya: "We need to talk, as Humanists, about the fascism and how they're using religious fundamentalism in Bangladesh."

Salil explains how there can be a corrosive impact from fundamentalism even when it's seen by the majority as wrong and fringe. But there's some hope in focusing on that opposition.

Bonya says she is less hopeful, in India can at least still speak of elections, in Bangladesh democracy is now a sham, the elections widely reported as rigged, opposition suppressed.

Questions from the floor now. Salil rejects the idea that "Hinduism can't be fundamentalist", notes caste discrimination and social control and culture of offence and direct attacks on those who oppose it.

From the floor @GogineniBabu also rejects any idea that Hinduism or India is immune to fundamentalism, explains how he faced blasphemy charges recently (more: humanists.international/two-representa…)

Another question focuses on Modi's prior complicity in violence against the Muslim minority. Andrew also refers the room to the Humanists International Freedom of Thought Report: fot.humanists.international.

Another speaker from the floor relays his concern at how little criticism there was of the recent Brunei penal code in Bangladeshi media.

Asked about Pakistan, Bonya rejects the kind of "hatred" that can exist after war, but also notes than many Bangladeshis drawn to conservative religion may see Pakistan as a model.

Salil notes that Modi's project can be described as a way of turning India into a kind of mirror image of Pakistan.

Another question, on the role of social media in spreading viral info e.g. false rumours of eating beef that lead to public lynching. Andrew says it's a very interesting point, notes role of social media accounts sometimes outside of countries that drive outrage abroad.

Bonya says it's credible to speculate that without social media Avijit Roy may never have been killed. It's online that outrage spread and maybe where his whereabouts were spread so quickly. But even then, we must see the goods of participation as well as the evils it enables.

Salil says yes you can't simply stop the monster now, but it would be right to prosecute the people who really incite hate and make threats online through social media.

Another questioner draws attention to past atrocities going back decades to argue against the idea that rule under Modi has been exceptional. Speakers respond robustly that trends do come and go but this is a bad one!

Bonya discusses the shift in demographics in Bangladesh, much lower proportion of Hindus over time, and how yes there were past atrocities but the rise in extremists politics is very real.

Does Brunei's new penal code make it harder for gay people across the region? Yes says Andrew, every piece of political theatre adds to a weight of norms. Salil notes supreme court decision in India as a reason for some optimism in that country.

Bonya notes that women standing up against oppression is another cause for hope.