Are Hindus Aryans? Is India a Hindu-Rashtra?
These were debates that came up in 1970, then in 1990s, and now again in 2014. What’s common between all these eras? The fact that India was being governed by an organization that believes that Hinduism is the foundation of India. Prominent Historian Romila Thapar, who has recently come under attack for her ‘anti-India’ views, reiterates yet again her reason for not giving into a rewriting of history on communal lines. Calling her writing a rational presentation bereft of fantasy, she feels that the representation of ‘India’ is a colonial remnant. She also says that India is still represented as ‘British India’ primarily so that Parsis, Muslims, Sikhs, basically anyone who isn’t ‘Hindu’ can be labelled an ‘alien’.
Scholars like Thapar, who have been vocal about their views are being targeted, harassed and even assassinated. In the past few months, the alarming scenario of intolerance is destroying the democratic basis that India stood on. And unfortunately, the Hindu rashtra is a piece of colonial scholarship, espousing debate even today, in 21st century India.
Vid
Whatever Hindus are, they are very weak and coward people. Neither they could fight against Muslim invasion nor Britishers. They only hated each other, still do to extreme bitterness in the name of caste. That’s why Hindus can be good employee or servant but never a good administrator. They lack the basic courage, honesty and impartial attitude to be a good admin.
Srinivas
Yup, they are also good at self flagellation, and let arseholes like you tell them what they are good at.
By the way, how many “scholars” were assassinated? Do you have some questions for the Congress Chief Minister of Karnataka, the state where one of this killings happened, and they haven’t made a single arrest nor any progress in the investigation?
Srinivas
I am so glad this bloody old coot, the Mafiaso of Indian history, has finally been shown the door. Good riddance.
kafir mard
epic reply dude ….. wonderful retort to the tarted twisted kind 😉
Adarsh Kumar
The irony here is that ‘the prominent historian’ thapar claims to be writing away from communal lines and calls her theories as ‘rational representation’, when, in fact, she is supporting a theory which was brought forth by Britishers to justify their colonial rule. Also, colonials used the fact that Sanskrit and a number of languages (including their own) share linguistic characteristics and ‘hence’, brought forth the theory that the Aryan race came to India from outside. But why not say that they went out from India? Coz that would make Indians superior then them in a sense. And then they invested themselves and all their energies into proving they were right. Mind you, they never opened up to the other very likely possibility. And when you are so invested in an outcome, you will successfully bring that outcome and label contradictory information as misinterpreted or degraded or just leave it in the dump as useless. Same is with thapar. She may claim that she is rational, when in fact she is lying through her teeth and is biased towards the western viewpoint. For any rational viewpoint would include facts and all the viewpoints, not just one.
Now, I am not in favor of hindu rashtra, but I hate it when people try to misrepresent history for some imaginary ‘western supremacy’. I am pretty sure now I will b labelled by some as a communist or anything, for those people, I will only say this. Open your mind and read the comment carefully. I am not in favour for any one result. I am in favour of a rational viewpoint and the result thence obtained. And also, one interesting fact. The dates set for vedas(around 1500bc), were set according to Bible! Not facts, not historical texts, but a self contradictory religious text! And this is acceptable by Thapar! But when dated according to the actual data in vedas, it comes bout 3000 BC. That is unacceptable. Why? Were the writers of vedas not well versed with astronomy or cosmology? If that’s true, how come the oldest veda, the Rigveda, has the exact speed of light, that too correct as a standard approximation in the present world ( just an example)? Why are viewpoints of vedas unacceptable but what Bible says is true? Isn’t this communism?
Adarsh Kumar
Sorry for the communism is the last sentence. I meant supremacism.