When you say "an affront to our values", which ones do you mean?

To be honest, that sounds completely on-brand for Al Jazeera Arabic.

"We are entrusted & empowered, often, to tell stories we see ignored and marginalized from perspectives that are ignored and marginalized." 🤡 Image
"Qatar is thought to see Al Jazeera as an instrument of influence, increasingly so as its foreign policy has become more active ... but its English networks in particular have generally recruited journalists who see their work in more progressive terms."

theguardian.com/media/2021/feb…
"The launch of Rightly would have been less surprising to those familiar with Al Jazeera’s Arabic output, which reflected a more conservative ideology, said Dr HA Hellyer, a senior fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and the Carnegie Endowment."
“Al Jazeera Arabic is a rightwing channel ... The distinction between such channels in the Arab world is more: are they rightwing in favour of non-state, pretty-rightwing, Islamist groups? Or are they rightwing in favour of authoritarian regimes opposed to such groups?”

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ruchir Sharma

Ruchir Sharma Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ruchirsharma_1

27 Feb
Joined @Sanjay_Dixit on the @JaipurDialogues with a new look, to discuss:

- How liberal aesthetics helps hegemonic powers maintain a status quo where they benefit
- The meaningless of Non-alignment, Ahimsa and Panchsheel without power
- The Nehruvian state's 'civilising mission'
Plus, shout out to @SanksP for his "bigotry of high expectations" theory, which we discuss here, in the case of why countries that achieved independence through non-violence (like India and South Africa) are treated to a different standard than those who use violence as a tool.
Plus, here is an animated version of the Slavoj Žižek lecture referenced in the talk.

Where he talks about how modern liberalism is a sham, designed to help the elite feel good about their place at the top, without needing to change the system at all.

Read 12 tweets
20 Feb
Nice coping mechanism!

Someone still has not got used to post-liberalisation India, where:

1. Vernacular-speaking business owners from small towns now have more purchasing power than the mentally colonised sepoy-munshi-dalaal-vakeel Anglophone artificial elite.
2. The old Anglophone establishment elite turned decadent and dependent on decades of government patronage, which was taken away in 2014.

Reduced to begging their white masters to intervene and restore the precious feudal privileges bestowed on them by the 1947 power transfer.
3.Their soft new generations lack the killer instinct to enter the IAS, run for election, or start a business, so they emigrate to where they think they'll fit in, or cope through desperately holding onto their monopoly on narratives, as native interlocutors for neo-colonialists.
Read 7 tweets
16 Feb
"A flourishing relationship between India and Russia is also preferable to the alternative scenario in which India becomes a staunch U.S. ally while a desperate Russia is forced to become a junior partner in a renewed Sino-Russian alliance."

foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/16/u-s…
"India’s main value to the United States is as an independent power in its own right ... Meanwhile, Russia’s relatively equal relationship with India promises a stable partnership that can keep the peace without either country gaining the upper hand."
"The United States should actually welcome India’s purchase of Russian arms.

When it comes to confronting China across Eurasia, the United States needs India much more than India needs the United States."
Read 5 tweets
15 Feb
The Third World was not a pejorative term, as it later came to be used, but an ambitious political project premised on a moral alliance of anti-imperialist states pursuing an agenda of economic development, national sovereignty, and peaceful coexistence.

tribunemag.co.uk/2021/02/the-re…
The foremost question on the minds of Third World leaders was of political economy. How might they pursue industrialisation with the purpose of raising the living standards of their people in a world economy still essentially structured around imperial relations of domination?
International corporations looked to the Third World to make wood chips or potato chips, not microchips.

This left Third World states primarily accountable to the demands of both financial investors and their export customers and less and less to the demands of their population.
Read 5 tweets
8 Feb
Technically the second PM.

"People forget that democracy is more natural to India than to any other country. There was democracy in India before any other country in the world ever dreamt of it...We had republics, fully, fairly elected, 2500 years ago."

The people of India have a long tradition of indigenous democracy, going back to the Mahajanapadas of antiquity to village Panchayats even today.

Democracy is not the gift of the West to an unsuited public. The public wanted democracy, but were given 'feudalism with elections'.
"It is not that India did not know what is Democracy ... There was a time when India was studded with republics, and even where there were monarchies, they were either elected or limited."

Dr Ambedkar, presenting the final draft of the Constitution, 1949

asian-voice.com/Opinion/Column…
Read 7 tweets
2 Feb
Hindutva does not belong to Modi nor his party, it belongs to the people as a unifying, decolonial ideology similar to pan-Africanism or Yugoslavism.

His own brand of "positive secularism" is even milder - deepening special rights and welfare schemes for religious minorities.
After the disbanding of the Hindu Mahasabha and Jana Sangh, Hindutva as a political ideology does not even exist, except as a bogeyman in the minds of the Anglophone elite.

Even the BJP gave up Hindutva for civic nationalism, Gandhian socialism, and positive secularism in 1980s.
Under Modi, there has been compete policy continuity on minority rights and welfare from the Congress era, with little to no "Hindutva agenda" coming to see the light of day.

The most radical policy they can dream of is religion-neutral laws and equal rights for equal citizens.
Read 18 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!