GARLAND AND MONKEYS OR THE GITA AND IDIOTS

A WIDE CANVAS

GARLAND AND MONKEYS OR
THE GITA AND IDIOTS

The Haryana govt. decides to introduce the Bhagavad Gita in the school curriculum. Secular outfits- the self styled intellectuals and  leftist newspapers like The Hindu are crying foul, calling it indoctrination. The so called nationalist elements are happy, that something is being done to uphold 'Hindu dharma' at last. Both are mistaken.

Take the charge of 'indoctrination' touted by the leftist-secular combine. It is not that the teaching of the Gita alone, amounts to indoctrination. The whole of the educational system, from the elementary classes onwards, is an elaborate and regimented system of indoctrination. Take any language or subject- one has to learn it in the manner prescribed in the syllabus, as written in the textbooks, as taught by the teachers, as assessed by examiners - all controlled by the govt at every stage. Even in colleges, one cannot question the textbooks, cannot argue with the teacher, cannot give a different idea or version.

 In Tamil Nadu for instance, it is taught that Aryans invaded India around 1500 BC, that Mohanjodaro-Harappa were Dravidian, that this civilisation was destroyed by nomadic Aryan tribes,etc. Ask them for the proof- you will be dubbed an Aryan or his agent. Is this not indoctrination?

Take the freedom movement. We are taught that it was exclusively or mainly the work of Gandhi-Nehru group. What about Lal-Pal- Bal? or Sri Aurobindo? or Netaji Bose? or Veer Savarkar? or Bhagat Singh? You must be a Hindu fundamentalist or fascist if you raise such issues. Is this not indoctrination?

If you look at the language textbooks, you will see a standardised language. The student has to reproduce the exact words in answering the examination- not one word less or more. (I have seen the answer scripts evaluated and returned by the teachers).The govts  make some languages compulsory.  Is  not all this  indoctrination?

Take the general ideas that are taught through the system: democracy, socialism, secularism (as defined by them). Do they not amount to indoctrination? 

This is at an elementary level. If you go deeper, you will find that the very idea of compulsory education all over the world is for indoctrination- of what the ruling cliques consider desirable or good for the country; in totalitarian countries or even Indian states ruled by communists, it is what the comrades determined for the benefit of the people. And if you think still deeper, like Ivan Illich, you will find that the whole system is to indoctrinate the people to become consumers to sustain the military-industrial complex. So, whether it is totalitarian or so called capitalist system, education is an instrument of indoctrination at the hands of the ruling powers.

 From: www.integratingdarkand light.com
A million thanks. This expresses my idea beautifully!

It is what even newspapers like The Hindu do. By supporting the leftist line, and projecting their world view, they are slowly indoctrinating their readers. Is the Hindu neutral in its reporting or in its editorials or op-ed features? Even take their literary supplements.Do they not cover the items liked by the editor? Are not the choice and comments according to the editor's preferences or prejudices? Does this not amount to indoctrination?

So the problem is not about indoctrination- it is about the type of indoctrination. If the indoctrination is for the leftist-pseudo secular-progressive ideas, it is right. If it is different it is wrong. This is the position of the so called secular clique.

Ivan Illich (1926-2002), one of the greatest  original thinkers and social critics of the 20th century. Everyone interested in the subject of education should read his book 'Deschooling Society' to understand the damage being done by our education system in modern economies.
This picture taken from: http:://thefrailestthing.com. Gratefully acknowledged.

 Sheep herded in a Kashmir farm.
From: www.risingkashmir.com

And unifromed children herded in a Thai scool- as in formal schools  all over the world. 
From: maytermthailand.org/2012

Now take the other side- those people who believe that the Gita is a noble or excellent scripture and that it should be taught to every one. These people may be prompted by a genuine desire to teach people to learn good things. But they are being naive, or down right idiotic. 

From: www.rsenthilkumar.com
Copyright status not known. Acknowledged with thanks.

Those who have studied the Gita know it to be a great scripture. But it is an essentially religious book, not secular literature. The Gita itself calls itself an Upanishad, Brahmavidya and Yogashastra. Every chapter in the Gita is called a Yoga. In the colophon at the end of every chapter it clearly says:

Om tat sat iti Srimad Bhagavad Gitasu Upanishatsu Brahmavidyayam Yogashastre Sri Krishnaarjuna samvadae.......etc

Now, it is evident, that the Gita cannot be considered apart from the specific context: the Mahabharata war, the personalities of Krishna and Arjuna, the tradition of Brahmavidya, Upanishad and Yoga, the concept of Om, Tat, Sat, etc. The whole of the Gita deals with dharma- the concept and its varied dimensions. Finally, Krishna says: discard all dharmas and surrender to Me. It is very clear that the Gita is thus a supremely religious, specifically Hindu book. What right has anybody got to inflict it on every one, especially others who may not believe in or subscribe to any of these ideas?

And I will go a step further and say that those who advocate the indiscriminate and universal teaching of the Gita are not even proper Hindus. They are fanatic idiots.

Let us study the Gita itself carefully and see whether it has any rules regarding its teaching.. At the end of his discourse, Krishna  calls it:

- "Guhyat guhyataram:" ( 18.63)
    wisdom more profound than all profundities

 "Sarva Guhya tamam"  and 
"Mae paramam vacha" ( 18.64)
  the profoundest of all.
  My supreme word

- imam paramam guhyam (18.68)
  this deeply profound wisdom

 He also lays down as to whom it should be taught. 

Idam te naatapaskaaya 
naabhaktaaya  kadaachana
Na cha ashushrushavae vaachyam
na cha maam ya: abhyasooyati         18.67

This is never to be spoken by you  to one who is devoid of austerities or devotion, nor to one who does not render service, nor to one who cavils at Me.

In the very next sloka, ie 18.68, Krishna says this is to be taught by one to His devotees : madh bhakteshu.

It is thus very clear that Gita is not meant for every one; it is not to be taught to every one; it has to be studied by one with proper preparation and qualification.

So, what is one to think of those who want to impose the study of Gita on every one-even among the so called Hindus, leave alone non-Hindus? Whatever may be the intention, such people are ABSOLUTE IDIOTS, DOUBLE-FILTERED FOOLS. They are the great enemies of Hinduism. 

In any religion, the effort to impose one doctrine or view on every one is indicative of a very low I.Q of the people who make such moves, and fanaticism. This is very unfortunate. 

The Bhagavad Gita is the supreme wisdom of the Hindu tradition. It is not to be made vulgar or cheap by being introduced in the rotten school system, through teachers who may or may not be interested or competent or devoted. 

In the famous Sermon on the Mount, Lord Jesus Christ said:

Do not give what is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet and turn and tear you in pieces.                              Matthew 7.6

It can be seen that this is an echo of what Lord Krishna has said in the Gita. 
When will these Hindu idiots learn? Will they ever learn?


NOTE:

It is a fundamental tenet of Hinduism that great teachings should only be imparted to the proper persons- those who have qualified themselves by suitable preparation by way of learning, austerity,penance,discipline, due discharge of duties, etc. And it is always for the earnest student to go in search of a teacher. No true teacher goes around searching for students in religious matters. They do not advertise or advance themselves. As Sri Ramakrishna said, when the flower opens , the bees come of their own. All our scriptures lay down qualifications for learning Upanishads, Brahmavidya. 

Thus Kena Upanishad:

Tasyai tapo dama:
Karmeti pratishtitha veda:
Sarvaangaani satyam aayatanam        4.8

Austerity, self-restraint and spiritual practice form the foundation of Self-Knowledge. The Vedas are its limbs, Truth is its abode.

Thus Mandukya Upanishad:

Tad etat rchaabhyuktam
Kriyavanta: shrotriya Brahmanishta:
Svayam juhvata ekarshim shraddhayanta:
Teshaam aevitaam Brahmavidyam vadaeta
Shirovrtam vidhivadhyaistu cheernam.    3.2.10

This very doctrine is declared in the verse.

Those who perform the rites, who are learned in the scriptures, who are well established in Brahman, those who offer themselves as oblation to the sole seer with faith, by whom the rite of carrying the fire on their head (Shirovratam- a type of tapas) has been performed- to them alone one may declare this Brahmavidya- this supreme knowledge of Brahman. (It is evident that some words here in this passage are pregnant with mystical  and symbolic significance).

As the Gita is both Brahmavidya and Upanishad, all the austerities and preparations and precautions prescribed in the scriptures are to be observed before one takes up the study of the Gita in earnest.This is what Krishna himself reiterates in the Gita. It can be seen how foolish is the idea of teaching it through the school system. And how anti-Hindu in spirit!

LEADERSHIP AND IDEAS

A WIDE CANVAS

LEADERSHIP AND IDEAS

What do our leaders know?  Do they update their knowledge? What are the sources of such updating?

John Kenneth Galbraith, that fine economist who was the US Ambassador to India during the Kennedy years once related an incident. He was once visiting President Kennedy in his office and noticed a book he had read lying on his desk. Kennedy mentioned that it dealt with the state of Burma then. Galbraith was in India, so near Burma but had not known about the book! He took it from the President to read, to update his knowledge of the region. Imagine the President of the US reading a book on Burma amidst all his other important work! This is how real leaders remain leaders, and grow in knowledge.

J.K.Galbraith around 1940.

In the absence of such growth, leaders remain captives of old ideas and formulae, trapped in a mental past. As Lord Keynes, perhaps the greatest economist of the last century said:

The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful  than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences are usually slaves of some defunct economist.

Madmen in authority,who hear voices in the air are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back.

I am sure the power of vested interest is vastly exaggerated compared with the gradual encroachment of ideas.

Lord Keynes in 1933.

It is good for a leader to be a man of ideas, or at least to be receptive to new ones. But there are ideas, and ideas. Our PM Modi is moved by the idea of "development". But how does he propose to achieve it? "Make in India", he says. And for this he is inviting the capitalists of the world to come, set shop or factory in India. He is even prepared to acquire good farm lands for the purpose.

PM launches 'Make in India'  global initiative.
"By Narendra Modi [CC BY SA-2.0 (http:://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0] via Wikimedia Commons"

Now. The idea of development is not so novel. This was what Nehru was repeating over 60 years ago, when we were in school and college. This is an old cliche which means nothing, in practice- except perhaps more paper schemes, more bureaucracy, more expenditure, more taxes, higher inflation, more corruption, and greater all round misery for the common man. The industries selected for the  'Make in India' initiative are all highly polluting and it remains to be seen whether Indian bureaucracy can enforce strict norms, to ensure that our land and environment are not further degraded- a task in which they have failed so far.  

Nehru sought to achieve it through Soviet-model planning and socialistic pattern, through a mixed (up) economy which ended in disaster in 1991, two years after USSR itself collapsed! And Modi is trying to do it through crony capitalism ( All capitalism today is crony capitalism, like all socialism is bureaucratic and political control). Unless he can be clear as to what contents he puts into the idea of 'development' it is just empty slogan.  Who knows. People unfairly accuse his party  of being  Hindu fundamentalist, so he might be revealing himself as a development fundamentalist! Or growth maniac, as Nehru was planning maniac! But all fundamentalisms are unbalanced reactions to a hostile environment. And do not work. 

After all, Russian Communist fundamentalism was not defeated by Western capitalist fundamentalism, or by NATO, or weapons. It collapsed due to its won unworkability and innate illogicality. And subsequently, it has not emerged as a market economy, either. And western capitalist fundamentalism was saved in the 30s by the prescriptions of Keynes- ie by timely and intelligent modification. But later it too led to problems of 'stagflation'. But it was more due to over dosage and wrong usage ( ie application for inappropriate problems) , rather than due to the defect of the medicine itself. No economic solution is a panacea for all ills; problems arise when politicians and their paid economic stooges make a fetish of it. It is very much like what we hear today in the medical profession: indiscriminate use of antibiotics has made many strains of bacteria drug-resistant: hardly a defect of the antibiotics themselves!

The point is: the kind of 'development' model Modi has in mind also does not work well. Here too the words of Keynes are apt:

The decadent international but individualistic capitalism in the hands of which we found ourselves after the war is not a success.It is not intelligent.It is not beautiful.It is not just. It is not virtuous. And it does not deliver the goods. In short we dislike it, and we are beginning to despise it. But when we wonder what to put in its place, we are extremely perplexed.

This is the problem we face. Our experience with socialistic pattern was painful , full of self-inflicted suffering and frustration. We certainly do not want to go back to the permit-quota-licence-inspector Raj. But did it ever end? It is very much alive. Our FM lives by it. All our politicians are so used to it.  And then, we have today international corporate capitalism, not individual capitalism. And the measures that Modi sarkar proposes  will make the international gangs loot India. His team is already playing ball with promoters of GM crops- not scientists, but corporates who employ the scientists to do their bidding! (while there is great agitation in all developed countries against GM crops). Development as an idea is good. It is our understanding of it, the shape we give it, and the road to it that are strewn with problems and difficulties. From the frying pan, we should not jump into the fire.

The  basic economic problem is simple. It is our fixed ideas, and commitment to certain positions which prevent a solution. The problem is  that all our political parties live on dead dogmas. Nehru was from Cambridge. Man Mohan Singh is from Cambridge. Amartya Sen is from Cambridge. (These latter two were students of Joan Robinson who was an admirer of the Lenin-Stalin-Mao dispensation and was blind to its faults and atrocities.)They can only look at the world through socialist glasses, which are outdated.

 The alternative is not the type of MNC capitalism that is practised in the US.  It is not Free Market enterprise. Today, the whole world is converted into a market , controlled by the big MNCs., moved by speculation, huge financial flows and lack of national or international control.The US survives on debt; it survives on military-industrial complex; it survives on the capitalist-politician nexus. It survives on unrestrained, mad, senseless consumption, generating  enormous waste and pollution and environmental damage. They cut welfare and foster the corporates who have transferred manufacture and employment outside the country for the sake of their profit. So, it is corporate bottom line that drives their economy- for the time being. And when they have a problem, they can externalise it. This model can hardly work in other countries. Every one will not have an Iraq to invade, if there is a domestic economic problem.

India has the resources; it has the market; it has the trained workforce; it has or can make the technology which we need. And we have the requisite skill and manpower which is enriching the whole world. Then why does it not work here?  Why can we not make what we need here, ourselves? Because it is not allowed to work here! Leaders like Man Mohan Singh (if ever he was one) and Modi and others of all political hues do not allow it to work! Political colonialism is replaced by corporate colonialism!

A leader should know what to do. His team should know how to do it. The bureaucracy should be cut to size and made to work, and made accountable for what 
it fails to do. It is 10 months now since Modi took over. What has he to show for it- substantial, not symbolic? It was J.K.Galbraith who said:

All of the great leaders have had one characteristic  in common: it was the willingness to confront unequivocally the major anxiety of their people in their time. This and not much else is the essence of leadership.

Churchill in England during the Second World War, Franklin Roosevelt  in the US during the depression readily come to mind as leaders of this type. Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore was such a leader. Though Nehru is eulogised, he only increased our anxiety: Kashmir problem, linguistic states, China problem, growing statism, economic failure- he increased our anxiety on all fronts. A leader has to put the bureaucracy to work. Modi had enormous good will. And he generated some hope. Time is running out, and hope is turning into vapour.

NOTE:
1.

Our govt still measures growth or development by GDP. This is pure bullshit.  GDP just indicates the money income generated in an economy in a year, and does not measure welfare. Nor does it show how the national stock has been affected. Simon Kuznets, who proposed the measure of national income (but not in the form of GDP which developed later) in 1934 to the US Congress very clearly said:

The valuable capacity of the human mind to simplify a complex situation in a compact characterisation becomes dangerous when not controlled in terms of definitely stated criteria. With quantitative measurements especially, the definiteness of the results suggests, often misleadingly,of a precision and simplicity in the outlines of the object measured. MEASUREMENTS OF NATIONAL INCOME ARE SUBJECT TO THIS TYPE OF ILLUSION AND RESULTING ABUSE, especially since they deal with matters that are at the centre of conflict of opposing social groups where the effectiveness of an argument is often contingent upon oversimplification.

 All these qualifications upon estimates of national income as an index of productivity are just as important when income measurements are interpreted from the point of view of economic welfare. But in the latter case additional difficulties will be suggested to anyone who wants to penetrate below the surface of total figures and market values. Economic welfare cannot be adequately measured unless the personal distribution of income is known. And no income measurement undertakes to estimate the reverse side of income, that is, the intensity and unpleasantness of effort going into the earning of income.THE WELFARE OF A NATION CAN, THEREFORE, SCARCELY BE INFERRED FROM A MEASUREMENT OF NATIONAL INCOME AS DEFINED ABOVE.

 Simon Kuznets (1901-1985) Author of the concept of National Income and its measurement. Nobel Laureate, 1971.
www.nobelprize.org.

Just see how cautious Kuznets is in proposing this measure, and how candid in telling us that this does not measure welfare! Great people do not make tall claims. It is the tin-horn economists who have made GDP a sacred cow, and use it as an unchallenged measure of welfare. In subsequent years, mainstream economists concentrated increasingly on GDP,(Quantitative measurement) and neglected welfare (qualitative aspects). For instance if a city should be bombed, or be subject to an epidemic, the resulting increase in economic activity would add to GDP! How nice!

2.

French President Sarkozy appointed a Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress in 2008, consisting of 25 eminent social scientists, including 5 Nobel Laureate economists. In their report, the Commission dealt with the inadequacies of the concept of GDP and said "GDP fetishism" should be given up. It highlighted some fundamental issues, two of which are very relevant to us right now. The GDP does not reckon how our capital is used up, in creating income. Second, it does not take into account the effect on future generations of our present development policies. For instance, if our mineral deposits in Orissa and Jarkhand are used up now, with generous help from MNCs under 'Make in India', it will surely boost our incomes now, but be disastrous for future generations, whose choice will be restricted or taken away. This is an issue of social, political and economic ethics. I wonder whether our politicians  or economists think about such deeper issues at all!

Nicolas Sarkozy, former French President.
By European People's Party[CC BY-SA 2.0]
creativecommons via Wikimedia commons.



The report of the Sarkozy Commission is presented in a book with a very revealing title: Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn't Add UP.

But long before that, on 18 March, 1968, Robert F.Kennedy, who was running for Democratic party nomination for American President said in a speech:

Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year: but that Gross National Product- if we judge the United States of America by that- that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm, and counts nuclear warheads and armoured cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programmes which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the Gross National Product does not allow the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriage, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.

This was said almost 50 years ago not by an economist but by a politician who had had a liberal education! Economists are still out of their breath when it comes to welfare! It is such ideas which make for true leaders. We can get economists by truck loads, and politicians enough to fill all the seas of the world. To find a true leader will be a miracle.

At the Democratic party convention in 1964, Robert Kennedy recited these lines from Shakespeare in memory of his slain brother, President John Kennedy:

When [he]# shall die
Take him and cut him out in little stars,
And he will make the face of heaven so fine
That all the world will be in love with night
And pay no worship to the garish sun.

                   Romeo and Juliet,3.2.21-25
# In the original, it is 'I' in some versions.

 This is very poignant, for Robert Kennedy was himself assassinated on 5 June 1968, and became a little star!

Robert Kennedy speaking at a rally, 1963
By Warren k.Leffler.

DEMOCRACY IN PRACTICE

A WIDE CANVAS

DEMOCRACY IN PRACTICE

Every age believes in some ideas, which people just accept as  universal truths. Democracy, indispensability  of education and its beneficial nature are two such vital beliefs held today. Our system accordingly grants universal adult franchise and universal compulsory education. But ask people what they mean by democracy or education, and most people would not know- including so called educated people. This is of course not their fault. Democracy has been thrust upon them; education has become a craze.

In all Western societies, democracy developed in stages. They did not begin with  universal adult franchise. In England which is called the Mother of Parliaments, voting rights were granted on the basis of some qualifications, like property, and were gradually extended to cover all. Women got voting rights only in 1928. In the US, they got it in 1920. In both countries women had to organise themselves politically, and agitate for suffrage, often getting jailed and suffering inhumane treatment. The Press did not always support them. In the US, President Woodrow Wilson was a staunch opponent of voting rights of women; women groups picketed the White House when a Russian delegation was visiting, calling Wilson 'Kaiser'.

Women picketing the White House with this banner, January,1917. US National Archives.

One result of the long struggle  for voting rights was that people became well informed  and politically conscious. India being a colony,our people generally got all political ideas from England and here too , voting rights were given in 1921 to both men and women on the basis of property and educational qualifications. On Independence, universal adult franchise was granted. But it came without struggle or agitation; so our people also lost opportunities for public education.

The net result is that people vote without understanding the issues, except the minor or local ones. When the govt. talks of reform or liberalisation, do people understand and vote?  How many people know what WTO means in terms of our economic independence? How many people understand the implications of Foreign Institutional Investment? How many, even among the educated, understand what GM crops imply, or what 'terminator seed' means, and how they affect our food security, or rights of the farmers? 

Citizens agitating against the giant seed company Monsanto, powerful advocate of GM crops and seeds.Amsterdam,2013.
FLORIS LOOIJESTEIJN/Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0)
Taken from: news.sciencemag.org. Used here for purely non-commercial, educational purpose.

For instance the following risks have been raised by serious researchers/scientists about GM crops:

• Reduction in genetic diversity, and consequent loss of food security
• Unknown, long-term side effects of genetic modification
• development of monocultures
• Potential gene transfer and contamination of other organisms
• A few companies (biotech/seed/chemical) obtaining control over the world's food production and supply
• Loss of independence of farmers for using their own crop for seed purposes as they have enjoyed over millennia.
• Loss of livelihood for farmers who cannot compete with giant,commercial farmers/plantations, even if they want to continue with organic methods
• Massive increase in use of chemicals like herbicides which are proven to be harmful to health.

Note: I am indebted to various sources for this information. See for instance the writings of Dr. Vandana Shiva.

Every voter is also consumer of food. Do they understand these issues when they vote?

Citizen groups active in Europe against GM crops.

This picture is taken from  www.stopthecrop.org  Thanks.

Is irradiation of food good? Is iodised salt good for everyone? Should people be deprived of choice in a democracy? People hardly understand these vital issues.Most people equate democracy with being able to vote in an election; thereafter, they have absolutely no voice in policy or governance.

 Such is the power of the GM crop lobby that they charged those demonstrating against GM crops in Belgium as "criminal gangs".Fortunately, courts freed them.

This picture is taken from: www.stopthecrop.org. Thanks.

NOTE:

The science "establishment" always works as the stooge of vested interests, whether it is the 'industry-military' complex  or the govt.-MNC-big business nexus,or international bodies, which in turn are controlled by vested interests. Whether it is the health risk of smoking or radiation hazards of nuclear power plants or safe disposal of nuclear waste, science establishment has always supported the powerful lobbies. Only in  unavoidable circumstances, they admitted the risks. The so called "green revolution" has been shown to be economically and ecologically unsustainable. Now, the govt plans a second 'green revolution' based on GM crops. The scientists who work independently and point out the risks are usually in a minority. But history shows them to be right, in the end.

The newspapers and electronic media are dominated and controlled by interested groups who project their own views. They are driven by commercial, big-business advertisement money. The advertisers therefore call the shots.  On no important subject do informed debates take place. In TV debates, more heat and dust are raised than real information. And the fellows conducting the program cut the speakers whose views they do not like. They are not fair. And whatever may be said in the so called manifestos by the parties before the elections, the actual show is run by the bureaucrats. People's voice is not heard or respected by the govt.

Take two recent examples: one national, one state-level. The govt. wanted to reduce the subsidy on domestic gas. First they reduced the number of subsidised cylinders. Then they decided to pay the subsidy to a bank account and linked it with the Aadhaar number. This caused needless hassles, but the bureaucrats and the technocrats and the politicians did not care.

From: betalbatim.blogspot.com


 People then had to approach the Supreme Court to have this Aadhaar requirement quashed. If linkage with bank account was what they wanted, it could have been done directly without Aadhaar! The irony is, the BJP which opposed Aadhaar when it was in opposition, quietly operated it when it came to power! It can be easily inferred that this Aadhaar scheme is run with some hidden agenda, which gives more, hidden power to govt, which the govt is not willing to surrender!  The whole country is now like a prison, where every one can be easily monitored on the basis of the Aadhaar, and the mobile phone.That is why I say all parties in India are opportunists, all are hypocrites.

BJP leaders demanding scrapping of Aadhaar  before the elections! This is from a press meet on 30 March,2014 in Bangalore. Modi as PM has supported Aadhaar! Dr. Swamy in wrong company, again?
From: www.daijiworld.com/news

Then take the state level case- that of  Kannada as the medium of instruction in schools in Karnataka. All sections of the people- except the Kannada writers- are against it and prefer English medium. The Supreme Court had said , after many years of litigation, that the state govt. could not make medium  of instruction compulsory and that it should be left to the people. Still, the govt dragged its feet for several months. The Supreme Court had to reiterate its position once again.

From:www,desikanoon.co.in
2bp.blogspot.com 

If a state govt., which owes allegiance to the Constitution, shows such  open defiance , what is the message they convey to the people? And the very people running the govt themselves send their children to English medium schools! Again hypocrisy , and even perfidy, here. This is how democracy works in practice.

Note: The latest news (27 March 2015) is that Karnataka govt. has introduced two bills in the Assembly making Kannada compulsory!

Today, English is not the language of the colonial rulers. It is not the language of the elite. It is the indispensable medium of modern education. The 'mother tongues' or local languages are only literary languages and cannot serve as medium of instruction in any modern subject. So people do not want them as medium of instruction. They are used by  local political satraps as the instruments of power over minorities.They need language only if they talk sense! Power and money are the only languages they understand. And in the centre, Modi is a Hindi pusher. As if, if they impose Hindi and local languages on everyone, all the problems of India will be solved!

NOTE:
In Tamil Nadu, where local 'Dravidian' and 'Tamil' politicians have been adopting a vehemently anti Hindi, pro-Tamil line in public, they have been quietly educating their own children in English medium, and also making them learn Hindi! When a Tamil newspaper published photographs of some of these children, the offices of the paper were attacked by the party hoodlums!. This again is democracy in India, freedom of speech, right to information, law and order- whatever you will!

People  demonstrating in Japan against Monsanto, the monster seed company, in 2013.
Image from twitter user@wataruohashi

This is people marching against Monsanto in Germany.
Image from twitter user@julia_etc.
In 2013, over 2 million people demonstrated in 436 cities in 52 countries against Monsanto.
Both these pictures are taken from rt.com/news. Used here for purely non-commercial, educational purpose. Acknowledged with thanks.

ACADEMIC FASHIONS AND FRAUDS

A WIDE CANVAS

ACADEMIC FASHIONS AND FRAUDS

Napoleon is reported to have said that war is too important a matter to be left to generals. We may say in general that any subject is too important a matter to be left to academics.

From  social sciences such as history, sociology, anthropology to pure sciences such as physics and biology, the quest for knowledge has turned from a search for truth to the advancement of pet theories and suppression of criticism , denial of space to alternative views, and condemnation of critics in the name of academics. In this we see the academics ganging up like the forty thieves, like the mafia.

It is widely recognised that study of history cannot be objective; apart from the fact that facts or events are often recorded by people according to their own prejudices, there is no agreement as to what constitutes history. And writers indulge their prejudices or preferences, not only in the selection of data but also in their interpretation. But in many scholars such prejudices are innate: a Westerner can hardly appreciate non-Western approaches to history. 

 

Leopold von Rinke, German historian who initiated source-based historical studies.
By Julius Shraeder. Public domain. Wikimedia Commons.


Then there is the deliberate advancement of certain theories or views as the basis of assessment, such as Marxism and Feminism. Most writers judge the past with today's ideas in mind. And ruling cliques darken, whiten or distort facts. For instance, the Congress govts in India projected Gandhi-Nehru as the main force in the freedom struggle and neglected all other leaders.The Marxists subjected even ancient history to class analysis; they completely white-washed the negative and anti-national role played by them during the second world war.Thus every aspect of history as it is recorded, written and taught is full of holes.'Study the historian, before you begin to study the facts', said E.H.Carr, a noted historian of the last century.He believed that there did not exist a hard core of facts, apart from their interpretation. Carr was a leftist, and supported Lenin, Hitler and Stalin, praised their work, and suppressed their atrocities. He eulogised Marxism as the best form of totalitarianism, and as the future of the world.Alas! He died 7 years before the collapse of USSR! Thus, Carr's historical sense was faulty. We get more balanced views from Toynbee, who regards history as the study of cultures and peoples. Daniel Boorstin in the US viewed American history as "consensus"- beyond group and class interests.

Daniel Boorstin ,distinguished American historian. Unlike  current historians, he was not a narrow specialist; he had a broad sweep and deep understanding of many aspects of life.
Public Domain, Wikimedia commons.


On the whole, Toynbee, Boorstin and Will Durant provide a more balanced and far deeper understanding of history. It should be clear to any sober person that no society can survive if the different classes or groups are always engaged in fighting each other. People learn to adjust contending claims, and learn to live together , rather than trying to annihilate each other. And no group or class holds permanent sway. As the history of modern USSR shows, even modern communists could not hold on to power with all their military might.

Bust showing Cleopatra's nose, which is supposed to have influenced history!
By Louis le Grand, Altes Museum, Berlin.
Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons.

Perhaps the greatest current distortion in history is the West's attempts to play down the militant nature of Islam, for which the world's history of the last 1300 years stands witness. This is the technique adopted by the Marxist historians of India such as Romila Thapar who glorify the Muslim invaders and their role, and paint ancient India in unfavourable light. What Marxists attempted to do through writings and distorting history, Muslims on their part are physically accomplishing, destroying all the ancient monuments, to eradicate all traces of ancient, pre-Islamic history.

Buddha image disfigured by the Taliban in Afghanistan. No surprise that, since it is the place of Mohammad of Gazhni who destroyed Somnath! It is a wonder it was allowed to stand so long! Taken from www.deesha.org/2007. copyright status not known. shown here purely for educational purpose.

Islamic zealots destroying ancient monuments in Iraq.
Photo taken from www.freethinker.com.uk. Copyright status not known. Shown here for non-profit educational purpose.

Iran, Iraq, Syria were the seat of the ancient Mesopotamian civilisation,whose monuments  the Islamic State is deliberately destroying.

Map showing the extent of old Mesopotamia- a cradle of ancient civilisation.
By Goran tek-en [CC BY-SA 3.0(http:://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)] via Wikimedia Commons.

 The position is no different in the so called 'hard' sciences.Take Evolution, for instance. The Darwinian theory of evolution is taught with a ferocity and fanaticism that would shame a Marxist or Roman Catholic or Jihadist.This theory has been traditionally opposed by Islam and Christian churches, and this opposition has been routinely and contemptuously dismissed by the "scientific" community. But scientists themselves are increasingly questioning it. In 2007, 700 scientists signed an open statement expressing their doubt on Darwin's theory. (www.dissentfromdarwin.org) [In 2001, only 100 had signed it.] They said:

We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.

 Darwinists...have never asked scientifically if random mutation and natural selection can generate the information content in living things.

Yet, the mainstream science is monopolised by committed Darwinists who not only block independent research in their institutions, but refuse to engage even with scientific criticism. Consequently, "a trivial idea ..has been elevated to the status of a scientific theory that governs modern biology", says Dr.Michael Egnor, professor of neurosurgery and pediatrics at State University of New York at Stony Brook , one of the signers. What we have to remember is that this theory has not so far been scientifically proved, and the advocates are assuming away lot of things. Yet it is promoted in the name of science by the establishment, which refuses to deal with scientific evidence against it, projecting only one side of the story. This is so characteristic of the arrogant modern academic mind or religious fundamentalism.  

Ideally, research in the freedom of an academic institution like university should lead one to wherever it takes- in search of Truth.

Research holding aloft the torch of knowledge. Library of Congress, USA

 In practice, it hardly ever works that way. Right from the appointment of faculty, approval of research subjects, the approval of theses, so called "peer review" before publication in so called 'academic journals'- at every step and stage, some dominant group or vested interest is exercising its hold and killing or cutting dissent. Those who dare to stand out lose chances of grants for research, risk losing or missing coveted appointments, vilification and social ostracism. Even rumours are floated against them.

NYC New York Public Library Research Room.

By Diliff (Photography by Diliff, edited by Vessil) [GFDL (http:://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons"

Various reasons are cited for these developments- like funding, industry-academic nexus, influence of political or religious groups,etc. One is source of funding. It is said that oil, automobile, energy, and pharmaceutical industries,etc  lobby for suppression of research into new methods or products or areas. Church groups overtly or covertly controlling the institutions would not allow views inimical to them to be aired.

Often, it is a more subtle or sinister method at work. A professor would choose as faculty those who had been his or her own student, loyal to his line.  Even free expression of opinion in the discussions might led to undesirable consequences for the student in assessment. Often, plain professional jealousy is at work. And in some cases, women students face problems from professors seeking sexual favours. Even leading American universities like Harvard were in the news recently on this ground.

Widener Library, Harvard University: the largest library system in the world.

By John Phelan (Own work)[CC BY 3.0 http:://creative commons.org/licenses/by/3.0]via Wikimedia commons.

In India, our universities have never enjoyed true autonomy, in academics or administration. Even in the supposedly liberal era now, they are not free to fix their syllabus, prescribe qualifications for the faculty , even decide on holidays. What the autonomy of the deemed universities means in practice is that the student has no choice but to toe the line of the teacher, the teacher has no freedom but to teach the official line, etc. [In fact, in no field can Indians be really autonomous- trained as they are by the Macaulay education system to be clerks. Even the top functionary can only be a glorified clerk.]

Many universities in India are leftist dens, where dissent is not tolerated.. In Tamil Nadu,  theories like Aryan invasion, the supposed oppression of Dalits, who are supposed to be the original inhabitants of India, etc are gospel truth. 

Our mainline newspapers like Times of India and The Hindu shout loudest about freedom of speech and expression. But their own columns are reserved for expression of their own leftist-pseudo secular, anti-Hindu line. They do not report both sides of a story, they do not report all the facts, they do not disclose all. Even when these are pointed out they do not respond or care or correct themselves. So much material is available about the falsehood written by Arundathi Roy or Setalvad  in regard to Gujarat riots or about Mother Teresa. These newspapers will never report them. Yet, they talk of freedom of expression.They will magnify if a small church in some corner is attacked by unknown elements, but when hundreds of Hindu shops are burnt in Bengal or Hindus are forcibly converted in Pakistan, or missionaries indulge in their games, or NGOs utilise foreign funds without rendering accounts, these newspapers will not care or dare to report them. After all, they are secular: blind in one eye.

They operate on the principle that they alone have monopoly of truth, whatever they say is alone right, just or fair, that freedom means freedom to criticise the sober elements and silence their voice. Take simple things like dress in public places. If you insist on youngsters appearing properly dressed in public places, or in colleges, it is old-fashioned; if you expect decency in public places, it is restricting freedom. But if they advocate uncommitted men and women roaming the streets in the name of some Valentine day, it is freedom! If you say you are a Hindu, you are communal; if you say you are a Muslim and will not sing Jana gana mana, it is minority right! If you fast on Ekadashi, it is superstition; if the Muslims observe fast, it is religious freedom! If you seek cow protection, you are  communal. But if the Muslims want that pork should not be eaten, it is freedom. If you hit a street dog with a stone or stick, it is cruelty to animals; but if a Muslim bleeds a cow to slow and painful death for his 'halal' beef, it is religious freedom! What is Santa Claus to us or we to Santa Claus- whoever the devil he was- that we have to rejoice in him? But our newspapers will blow this up, which has lost significance even for most westerners, as if it is  an important national event for us Indians. The hypocrisy of the English language media is crossing limits, exactly as it is happening in the academia.

The leftists controlled education in West Bengal for over 30 years. They promoted their own Marxist view of history, supporting Moscow and China. And this continued even after USSR disintegrated and communism collapsed there. What freedom did they allow for others with alternative theories and views? The Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, and institutions like ICHR have  been captured by the leftists. What freedom did they allow independent or dissenting scholars? If a non-leftist is appointed , they shout as if some invasion has taken place. Any one dissenting is duly dubbed a fundamentalist, Hindu fanatic, etc. Their members even lied on the Ayodhya issue, and were fully exposed in the court hearings: that they had done no research, and were merely airing their or others' opinions. They even disputed established archaeological evidence. No front line newspaper in India had the decency to publish all the archaeological evidence or the arguments on behalf of the Hindus;but they will devote any amount of space to  promote the leftist views as secular, or to cine-stars and starlets. Yet they claim to be fair, and speak for freedom. These are all leftist tactics- shout for or in the name of freedom when you can, and crush that very freedom for others when you control things. 

We Hindus have to be vigilant on this front. In India, the so called liberal-progressive English media  of all varieties is basically promoting anti-Hindu agenda. They are staffed by such elements. Many of them carry Hindu-sounding names, while not being Hindu.. Those who write or voice opinions on Hindu issues hardly know or practise Hinduism first hand. For instance, Amartya Sen says that he was brought up in an atmosphere free of religious practices, yet he mouths opinions against Hinduism.  The same thing happened with Nehru. He was almost an Englishman by temperament, a non-practising Hindu and he gave a totally negative connotation to the word secularism.He never followed any idea of Gandhiji in any area.

Outside India, Hindus face extreme hostility. The western hordes (consisting of Churches, Muslims, media, academics, political elements, business interests etc) are noticeably anti-Hindu. In American campuses, Hindu religion is taught through textbooks which do not represent Hinduism truthfully, fairly, sympathetically or favourably. Nor is it taught by persons who practise the religion- as it happens with every other religion. This is a clear racial discrimination and denial of our right and freedom.Yet our PM has no time or head for such issues, but is only bent on pleasing Obama who is on his way out! Indian politicians do not realise that the West has been anti-India since Independence. America which was pro-freedom during Franklin Roosevelt's time, turned pro-Pakistan and has been its chief prop. American administration is anti-India, no matter who becomes the president there. Ambassadors like Chester Bowles and J.K Galbraith, two well-wishers of India had to struggle against their own administrations to support India. 

 Chester Bowles with president Kennedy

Oh, what a photograph! From left: Galbraith, President Kennedy, B.K Nehru. Lyndon Johnson, Pt.Nehru. 

One thing is clear. In academics or media, there is no such thing as neutral reporting or advocacy. Every editorial or main article in every newspaper only supports or advances the editor's or proprietors' policy and views. The way therefore for those who disagree with them, and who are denied space or voice there, is to find or found their own. This is  plainly more honest. Many of us have to continue to read papers like Times of India or The Hindu even when we know they are not factual and are biased, only because we do not have alternatives. It is like political parties: all parties sound or do alike. The BJP which opposed Sec.66A of the Information Technology Act in 2007 supported it when it came to power ! Fortunately, it has been struck down by the Supreme Court today. All are opportunists, all are hypocrites.

The world of academics, scientists and writers is also full of frauds and misdeeds. Plagiarism, fabrication, plain deception, cheating, bribery,sabotage, dishonesty and forgery in research, false or fabricated data- these are common among academics and scientists. It is said that in the US, up to 70% of the students cheat at the high school level. We are also slowly catching up with those high  standards!

NOTE:

1. The current situation in Iraq is alarming where the ISIS is on a mad spree to destroy all old monuments. It has already bulldozed entire cities. I request friends to see the reports and pictures on the Web- hundreds of them are available. Our mainline newspapers are strangely low-keyed in reporting the matter.
2. American academics, administration and European govts are not only observing studied silence in the matter, but are encouraging pro-Islamic studies on the campuses. Criticising Islam is considered to be breach of freedom on American campuses! (But one can criticise Israel, Hindus etc no end!) Oxford University recently instructed its writers to avoid references to pig, pork and other pig-related products in their books! And they cancelled a lecture by Dr. Subramaniam Swamy there recently! That is how fearful they are of the Muslim lobby! And that is academic freedom for you in the West!