Rahul,
I think you misunderstood me. When I said allow me to disagree with you in previous post this is what I meant. There is no point in what were the facts (satis/scavengers/POWs) centuries ago. I am strong believer that history and figures can be manipulated either way over a long period of time. As we pick scholarly writings that agrees with us or rather we agree with them, vicious people also come up with some counter arguments and there is no end and serves no practical purpose. Only present matters. And we do have problems.
I agree about manipulating history. This is already well documented in multiple discourses and you can sample one here:
The Peer-Review Cartel | Rajiv Malhotra
In brief its is about consensus building within a privileged and closed group of academics that resemble a mafia and then using power and authority to
maintain a fake credibility for ones substandard scholarship using syndicated publishing channels for spreading ones agenda driven by prejudices masquerading as academic discourse.
But I disagree about not studying the past as this is against the priciples of diagnosis. Which disease is diagnosed without studying the history of illness, its symptoms, the patients lifestyle, habits of consumption? You are negating the entire reason for the study of history on the premise that one has to be pragmatic. But pragmatism is not possible if there is a mis-diagnosis of the illness and you shove what you believe is a solution to their problems on the masses. And then are you saying we should accept whatever we hear or is written about us regardless of its truth? I am not impressed by arguments that express an unwillingness to probe the truth about the past masquerading as a more practical and pragmatic and enlightened philosophy. Sorry. It is a common ruse nothing more.
Here is a peep into the past:
According to hard data collated by Dharampal in the field of education in terms of the content and proportion of those attending institutional school education, the situation of India in 1800 is certainly not inferior to what obtained in England then; and in many respects Indian schooling seems to have been much more extensive The content of studies was better than what was studied in England. The duration of study was more prolonged. The method of school teaching was superior and it is this very method which is said to have greatly helped the introduction of popular education in England (p. 20). Superiority to the British system also existed in the proportionate numbers attending school, the conditions under which schooling took place and in the quality of the teachers. Basic reading, writing and arithmetical skills were widespread due to the prevalence of village schools where education was imparted at nominal cost according to the paying capacity of the parents. But the general impoverishment that followed upon turning India into a colony led to the fact that the middle and lower classes were no longer able to defray the expenses for the education of their children, who were instead put to labour to help them eke out a living.
From:
https://sites.google.com/site/sastudycentre/towards-indigenous-education
If you read the original article by Dharampal you will see how there was no exclusion of communities from education based on caste or religion or whatever.
The original article will be enlightening. It will tell you that it wasnt always the case that we have been wallowing in dirt and superstition all these centuries.
On the side but not relevant to the main point, One thing people seldom do is question how many negative practices arose after the widespread economic destruction, hunger and famines and killings took place. Think about how easy it is for a single bad manager to destroy the joy and spirit of employees working and living in a organization. Then extrapolate it to a culture where the entire countryside that is ravaged over generations.
The reviewer in the article does not believe in your approach of ignoring the past either:
Today if we want to embark upon the struggle to set up an indigenous education system in a society that is free of colonial and neo-colonial values and which is internally democratic it is important to understand the following facts unearthed by Dharampal:<snip>
dear, misunderstood again. Casteism and ceremony was the least of my concern. It was posted to say good number of people are still uneducated. And why this is so ?
A study of history will tell you that it started because the foundation of education has ben destroyed from village to village at the tip of a bayonet and arson as a tool. And a study of the history of modern politics will reveal that the same influences persists today although we attained freedom and supposedly in control of our destiny. Or do you want to deny that? And also deny that the Deobandi or Wahabi school of thought influences minds in India and Pakistan because India is supposedly in control of her borders? Or that protestant or catholic or secular ideology does not influence our education (regardless of their merits or demerits)
Here is a look at how it happened:
In pre-British times education and medical care, like the expenses of the local police and the maintenance of irrigation facilities, had primary claims on revenue. Such a system made it affordable and accessible to most people. The British diverted this revenue for their own purposes leading to a neglect of the large-scale school education provided through pathshalas, madrasahs and gurukuls and a variety of other kinds of schools and schooling and higher educational institutions and learning processes. The British preferred to set up and promote anglicized secondary and higher schools premised on the theory that if Western education was introduced among the upper classes it would filter down by a natural process to the lower classes. High fees were charged in these government-aided schools excluding poorer students by a natural process. These poorer sections began to be provided education by some Christian missionaries which had the effect of incorporating them too into the colonial framework. The strong divide in the educational field between the rich and the poor today is a legacy of British intervention, but is being nurtured today by the Indian elite.
I suppose you want to say it has no relevance to today and we should just get on with the business of fixing our education? What if I am a millionaire and come to you with a blind promise - I will educate the entire population of your country in the next 50 years, provided no questions are asked. Then I open madraasas all across India that teach the Saudi wahabi school of thought. Would you accept it blindly because I am showing practical results here and now today? What will be the consequences of India 200 years down the line?
The business of public administration and its efficiency are separate from the process of intellectual debate and argument. The two sets of people who participate on the ground versus those who set the direction also need to be different except at the policy level. Why are you confusing debate with the urgent need to get on with the business of educating the nation? The only legitimate cause for censoring a debate of this nature here is that it is OT
I do not disagree that our political leadership has failed to address the need for education and it is not disputable. But I would attribute at least in part, their lack of drive, impetus, motivation and nation building frevor to a lack of study of history and suitable perspectives on their own past. At least thats one side of the coin. The other motivation is that there appears to be an economic incentive (greed, short term profit) to actually keep things the way they are. I would speculate that our population does not join hands for collective nation building today because their psyche and collective pride has been damaged by a colonial mis-education. An argument to the contrary is like saying that an American kid should not be taught to feel pride in the marvels of engineering and nation building of his country, its sky scrapers and bridges and buildings but should derive from thin air a concept of the greatness of his nationhood. Or if the same standards that apply to India are used - feel a permanent sense of shame for his ancestors having genocided the native Americans and be reminded at every step how he doesnt deserve to enjoy anything that his modern nation has provided, without giving an arm and leg as compensation for the misdeeds of his ancestors
hyeah:
I am very much aware of politicians/think tanks/even pseudo intellectuals creating sense of victimhood in lower castes of society.
But hey!! we have elevated our selves from Upper vs Lower caste to Hindu-Muslim* to North-South Indians* to Maharastrians-Biharis* to Marathas-Brahmins*. People Do vote on these lines. So I repeat again we have problems and our glorious past is not helping us.
* All these divisions are very much real and we all are witnessing it.
Back to FDI please.
Regards
I am sorry if you think all this debate is about glory shouting. Todays problems exist because whatever education exists is insufficient in creating a sense of unity and a better understanding of our past and history and how we are all connected. It is because of this that the misguided Marathi Manoos feels the need to get aggressive with Biharis or South Indians or "Dravidians" against North Indian "Aryans". As for voting "along these lines" show me a protestant white citizen in the USA that votes against a leader that propagates their immediate interests ... or a catholic, or an Islamic
It is a silly point to argue and show we are more backward because of it. This cannot be debated and won. One has to take an interest in it as a hobby and join the dots and see the connectedness of things to appreciate the subtler points.
and finally - one of the points argued by our communist friends in particular is that these companies will come and take money out of India - which is true if they make profits.
What is the alternative? few select people are looting our country and keeping the proceeds at overseas tax havens anyways
So either which way - money is going out of India :clapping::clapping::clapping:
Well I am a strong believer in the allegory of Orwells "Animal Farm" and I have seen instances where they have play out in real life in Indian organisations and politics. The communists are equally guilty of bad governance in their states as the parties they oppose. Aren't they?
--G0bble
