In the sixty six years of freedom, India should have taken advantage of the English language and in developing higher education. Instead the Indians intensified caste system with reservations, stifled free market economics with licenses, and then crippled competition with dependence on foreign powers. Modi will rectify these problems in the long run if he increases the industrial production and improves infrastructure. We must not categorically blame Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay for everything that had occurred due to the policies of the Nehru dynasty. It is possible that without English language we would have been in greater trouble.
Re: We cannot blame Macaulay for everything
by Common Sense on Jun 19, 2014 08:12 PM
Varadarajan, The author is not blaming Macaulay for everything. He is blaming the people who carry forward Macaulay's idealogy... and there are a lot of them in India
Whatever the writer may say but english is here for good. We have to be thankful for the british for giving us english. The writer is retired defence personel and he should know that the ranks in the armed forces are the same in the royal armed forces. The Parliment, the Rashtrapati Bhavan, railways, police forces armed forces are also created by the British. Because of English we have got the best IT professionals and organsiations in the world. Most of the indians who have gone to the developed countries are competitive because of English. Stop being nostalgic and let India move forward with English
Re: the writer is expressing his thoughts in English
by Abhimanyu Singh on Jun 17, 2014 07:18 PM
I would like to differ brother. aren't china, taiwan, japan doing great without english. even germany, france, italy..all are doing great and you will see others example too if you try to look around. My point is that britishers replaced the soul of our country with English, which would have benefited us in some ways as you are suggesting but killed the identity of our country. It's one of the point writer mentioned that they made us such that we don't have any confidence in our culture or institutes we had. We survived and prosper for thousands of years without english, we just have to look at out heritage and other's doing the same to feel proud of it. Second, as you are saying English have created just SAHIBS and CLERKS (In IT as per you this time) but not the the leaders. English could be a good language for interpreters for communicating with the outer world but we must respect all our own languages which have a wider reach throughout the country.
PS: Irony is i have to type this in english as their is no other option for me :(
Re: Re: the writer is expressing his thoughts in English
by Varadarajan Ravindran on Jun 18, 2014 04:41 AM
Without English we will be in deeper trouble.
Re: Re: Re: the writer is expressing his thoughts in English
by aam admi on Jun 18, 2014 04:53 PM
even with English we are already in trouble. when there was no English , we were the Exporter and rich and people love to come here but now we are boneless corrupt people always looking Whites for rescue. Lost our confidence.
For each and every step we have to think, pros and cons. there are some body assess,and some more to comment though they are most corrupt incapable, some with knowledge some without knowledge
D. Goel pkl. morning8.30Am ,Tuesday17 June 2014 Colonel Anil is a brilliant patriotic Historian of Indian History spread over several Millennia. He rightly underscores that in Modi;s victory , the Indian approach to worldrightly emphasizes our veneration to Bharat. our Sarva-Dharma-Sambhav is high spirit asembodied in Paramhans Ramkrisna formula: Jator mund tator mat-ie as many Paths as many menD. Goel
Mr Athale, Few facts are wrong in your article, although I agree with the spirit of the article. 1. Before arrival of East India Company, Chandragupta, Ashoka, Samudragupta or Vikramaditya were part of myths. We could not read Ashokan rock edicts because we had lost knowledge of Brahmi script. We called ashokan Iron pillars as Bhima’s smoking pipe or walking stick. We didn’t know if Chandragupta was real and his empire extended from Afghanistan to Bangladesh and kashmir to karnataka. British scholar Sir William Jones studied Sanskrit classics and showed the world that Sanskrit has one of the most ancient and richest literature. Princep deciphered Brahmi script and established ashoka as a real king. Sir Alexander Cunningham showed the world how rich india’s past was. And by discovering Harappan culture, Sir John Marshall established indian civilization is among the oldest of the world. 2. There is no evidence that British tried to prove or could prove Aryabhatta, Sushruta, Bhaskara as myths
mr anil athale sir,while defining indian history poeple refer to all great kings like chandragupta maurya,ashoka,shivaji etc,but what about the great kings like srikrishnadevaraya,raja raja chola etc who ruled vast swathes of deccan india and tamilnadu even while mughals were ruling large parts of north and central india.i think credit should be given to dravidian rulers along with other great indian rulers else it will gross injustice in framing indian history thanks.
Excellent column. Kudos tot he author and Rediff for publishing this essay.
I agree with the columnist on all points except for this one particular sentence:
"....Mahatma Gandhi brilliantly used non-violent tactics against a British Empire enfeebled by two world wars to win freedom for India in 1947, possibly prematurely....."
M.K.Gandhi was a "Macaulite" and he had great regard for the English. Many of his actions were done to please his English masters. It is a misnomer to say that India attained independence due to M.K.Gandhi's non-violence. The proper thing to say is that India achieved independence not because of M.K.Gandhi, but in spite of M.K.Gandhi.
But for this different perception, I endorse all things that the Colonel has written.
Re: Kudos
by Abhimanyu Singh on Jun 17, 2014 07:24 PM
I understand you might have your reservations for Gandhi as he was obviously came through the british system of exducation. But if you see his actions and compare to the symbolism which writer mentioned for Modi about bhartiyata (bowing at the entry to parliament). Gandhi also got back to the INDIANNESS and put emphasis on khadi, swaraj and ram rajya to name a few. You should read this thoughts on how he perceived the INDIA of free from his essayes. He also renounced all the western comforts at his disposal and never got anything for himself. Everyone has their own shortcoming but remembering someone for his mistakes only is no justice to one's character. we should measure their good deeds against their mistakes and then only decide how they did.
Re: Re: Kudos
by Vishvaksenah E on Jun 19, 2014 11:02 AM
Abhimanyu Singh, Every cloud has a silver line.
Raqvana was a great scholar. he had mastered all the Vedas. he was a great musician. He was a very brave soldier. He was a very good administrator.
Hitler was a true nationalist. he lived and breathed for the upliftment of his country. He was a vegetarian too. He never amassed wealth and promoted his relatives.
Osama bin Lden was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He gave up a very lucrative business. Idi Amin was a patriot. He was indeed a very brave general .
But then history does not remember them for all their noble qualities .
MK Gandhi had numrous noble qualities for sure. But it was due to his few shortcomings that India is where it is now. It will take some time to 'de-gandhiise our polity. Sooner we flush his ideology down the drain of history, the better for the country. Like it or not, it is slowly but steadily happening.
Re: Re: Kudos
by Vishvaksenah E on Jun 19, 2014 11:02 AM
Abhimanyu Singh, Every cloud has a silver line.
Raqvana was a great scholar. he had mastered all the Vedas. he was a great musician. He was a very brave soldier. He was a very good administrator.
Hitler was a true nationalist. he lived and breathed for the upliftment of his country. He was a vegetarian too. He never amassed wealth and promoted his relatives.
Osama bin Lden was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He gave up a very lucrative business. Idi Amin was a patriot. He was indeed a very brave general .
But then history does not remember them for all their noble qualities .
MK Gandhi had numrous noble qualities for sure. But it was due to his few shortcomings that India is where it is now. It will take some time to 'de-gandhiise our polity. Sooner we flush his ideology down the drain of history, the better for the country. Like it or not, it is slowly but steadily happening.
This is propaganda. The British ruled India with help of Brahmins. They conspired together against Indians who didn't know English. Only when Brahmins will be removed from the country India will be free to become a superpower.
Re: They ruled India through Indians.
by ANANT T on Jun 16, 2014 08:09 PM
Dear Dravidian,
The Aryan-Dravidian divide was also a ploy successfully used by the British to divide north-south India. Many people like you still prisoner to that hoax. There is no historical proof of any 'aryan invasion'. Nehru, himself a mental slave to the British propogated this hoax through his 'Discovery of India'
Re: They ruled India through Indians.
by Kumar Hari on Jun 16, 2014 09:12 PM
dear dravidian , anyway bcos of ur reservtion all bramins will leave india . so enjoy an india without bramins , and free food fron the congis and DK govts like beggars that u are . u will get what u deserve
Re: They ruled India through Indians.
by Abhimanyu Singh on Jun 17, 2014 07:27 PM
dear brother "Hate breeds Hate". I think instead of blaming our ancestors for their mistakes now, we should look forward to future and try to correct those mistakes by giving everyone equal opportunities as we will only fall if we will walk looking back in the history. History is for learning the lessons and not repeating the bad one in future.
Re: They ruled India through Indians.
by R Chakravarti on Jun 17, 2014 11:53 PM
Who are the people who kill Dalits in TN? Brahmins or "Pure Dravidians"?
Some years ago, someone compared Prabakaran with Veerappan. Karunanidhi retorted that Prabakaran was a pure Dravidian!
