In one his Paris sermons, `Abdu’l-Bahā expresses anger over the fact that in France the drowning of twenty French people in a river has caused a great deal of controversy, while a blind eye is turned to the thousands of non-French killed elsewhere:

I am filled with wonder and surprise to notice what interest and excitement has been aroused throughout the whole country on account of the death of twenty people, while they remain cold and indifferent to the fact that thousands of Italians, Turks, and Arabs are killed in Tripoli! The horror of this wholesale slaughter has not disturbed the Government at all! Yet these unfortunate people are human beings too.[1]

`Abdu’l-Bahā criticizes the French government for being concerned only about the French whilst being indifferent towards other peoples. Unfortunately, similar treatments can be seen in the actions of Baha’is towards non-Baha’is.

In Baha’i culture there is usually silence regarding the oppression and death of the thousands and millions of people in wars worldwide and no government is criticized. On the other hand, if a Baha’i is discriminated anywhere in the world, especially in countries hostile towards Baha’ism, all means possible are used to persuade governments of other countries to exert pressure on those who infringe their rights.

Why does this discrimination exist towards different groups? Why do Baha’is remain somewhat “cold and indifferent to the fact that thousands of” people are being killed and oppressed worldwide? After all non-Baha’i “people are human beings too,” are they not? Is this the meaning of Oneness of Humanity?

Baha’is usually put forward the excuse that we do not participate in political affairs. If that is really the case, then why isn’t this policy exercised when their fellow brethren need their help? Whatever the excuse, the fact remains that in contrary to the claim about the Oneness of Humanity, in equal circumstances, Baha’is do not react the same way toward non-Baha’is that they do toward Baha’is.

[1] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Paris Talks, pp. 114–115.