News thats really not *news*

While on China, read this excerpt from Tarun Vijay’s excellent column in TOI:

“…How many Indian leaders have that faith in their nation’s great destiny? They are ashamed of their nation’s cultural and civilisational heritage and do everything to belittle the country.

One can face the world only on the strong foundations of ancient legacy.

China has a great civilisational history and a heritage that is has touched pinnacles of glory and achievement. The Communist government doesn’t feel shy about it.

In every official book on China, the glorious imperial past, its civilisational contours, the cultural and religious glory is presented with pride.

Patriotism is not a dirty word as is the case with Indian Communists.

We can face and stand before such a nation equipped with the strength that comes from pride in our civilisational heritage alone.

The poverty of pride in Indian roots and a sense of embarrassment about the Hindu heritage which is common to every faithful of Indian origin worshipping any god or religion create a paucity of confidence.

India is facing the same black hole of self-denying secularism which makes policymakers distance themselves from faiths having any resemblance or affinity to Hinduism. The lack of Bhakti (devotion) in the nation’s life mechanism deprive it of the essential Shakti, the ultimate power to deal with enemies within and without. Often, friends and foes are confused. “

From: The 2 am call

RE: the original post –

It is a national disgrace that we are not standing up to be counted when it matters (and I can also still remember our wishy-washy attitude to the Russian invasion of Aghanistan).

We should say this loud and clear that Tibet and Tibetans want to be free of Chinese rule – and we support this and are in solidarity with Tibetans.

Unfortunately, our muddled thinking on Kashmir prevents our politicians, with the notable exception of George Fernandes, of course, from taking the honourable path.

It is a national shame.

Hi VCK,

I was being “entertained” by prince on other posts, and could not reply to you earlier.

Actually, secularism *is* practised in word and spirit in many parts of Western Europe, more specifically France, all the Nordic countries and even UK. Many of these societies are now “post-christian” societies (as called by the Economist). Religion plays no part or very little part in the collective culture or behaviour of these societies. (which is another reason why countries like France and Netherlands are very worried about the behaviour of their muslim immigrants, but that is another story).

While the French and American revolutions pre-dates the consolidation of British rule in India, our revolutionaries borrowed a fair bit from them. The British, although christian, did not actually care that much about religion …. they were more concerned about profits. You will first find the concept of equality and separation of state from religion in the words of Chandrashekhar Azad and Bhagat Singh. They were later picked up by Nehru, although he twisted the concept beyond recognition. Gandhi, OTOH, was a not a votary of secularism. He believed that a state divorced from religion was an immoral state.

Cheers

Dear VCK,

When I said “post-christian” society, I meant that religion plays little or no part in these countries (the Nordic countries, France, Germany, UK), whether at a state level or a personal level. Maybe, the personal disassociation is what it takes to get to a really secular state. That would be an interesting discussion!

However, I do not believe the British or rather the English and the Scots introduced linking of religion to state in India. In India, even in the pre-British and pre-Mughal days, religious figures have always interfered or acted in statecraft in the form of raj-purohits or astrologers or whatever. There may have been a valid reason for this in those days as the brahmins were the best-educated of all classes and the kings depended on them for their “wisdom”. But, there is no reason for such interference today.

Coming back to the English, I am at least grateful that the English were the colonisers of India, rather than the Portuguese or the Spaniards. The reason for this is two-fold – one is, of course, the spread of the English language, which has become the defacto business language of the world. This colonial legacy has enabled us to leapfrog many others in economic growth and this will enable to us to move to the centre of the world, economically speaking.

Second, the English (and the Scots) were Anglican Protestants. They do not have the proselytising urge that the Catholics have (the portuguese/spaniards). The portuguese and the spaniards destroyed the local language, culture and religion in whichever place they colonised – south america, parts of asia and Goa. The English, on the other hand, mainly cared about profits from their Empire. This is why you will find that the christian community in India is mainly catholic and not protestant, which is what you would expect if the English were serious about conversion. And, the community is concentrated in Goa and Kerala (both non-English colonies) and in latter days, north-east (which was outside the inner-line of the British government)

The English brought in their system of education for reasons of governance – they wanted english understanding (and at least partially speaking) clerks to run their bureaucracy. At the same time, the Jesuits (part of the catholic church) wanted to set up “modern” schools in India. There was a co-incidence of interests, although first causes were different.

And, the English did not give the Jesuits money (they could barely tolerate them) but they did give them land for setting up their schools. The money came from Rome.

However, today the point to consider re: the English education is that the Law of Unintended Consequences has come into play. India is well set on its way to becoming a major world power thanks to a colonial innovation. So, let us use the English education system to its best to payback our colonial ex-masters!!!

cheers

Dear Patriot,
That is precisely the point that I wish to make. State and religion were never seperated. They have always played a role in the lives of the rulers, so let us not make any “SAINTLY” exceptions. let us learn to live with it.
As I have stated be it “ROME” or any “PLACE” it is the support that plays a part.
Let us understand that we stand one step ahead of everything, both in the past and in the prersent. In the past we never made any bones about the statecraft of the astrlogers and the advisers. “IT WAS THERE”.
Only when we bring in the graphical description of all the bunkum of “THE SUITING SECULARISM” that my hackles are raised.
Let us accept it and continue with our process of growth rather than playing double fiddle for being more “BRITISH THAN THE BRITISH” as the saying goes.
The “MODERN” educxation has note made any great impact on the lives of people, except maybe breaking up of society in the garb of “BEING EDUCATED” and a monstrosity of a “CLERICAL SOCIETY” devoid of any independent thinking.
May be I will await the time when we can payback our “masters’. But all that depends on the $$$ rather than our education!
Regards,
vck

Besides Baichung Bhutia, someone else with gonads:

Autonomous Yashwant defies BJP line, calls for ‘complete freedom’ for Tibet, Dalai Lama
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/293857.html

BRAVO, YASHWANT SINHA!

Dear VCK,

As a counter, I would like you to consider the following:

I think that a lot of our social mores, values, rigid structures and the blind worship of gray hair have a lot to do with the lack of innovation in modern Indian society .

As a case in point, look at all these bright Indian engineers who left India to work in Silicon Valley, and see the various innovations (albeit, mainly in the technology space) that they have come up with, including the development of the Microprocessor, which has changed the world as we know it. So, I think there is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that it is not the education model in India, but the overarching social system that is probably more to blame for what you call the “clerical society”. As India keeps growing and getting more self confident, my firm belief is that you are going to see a lot more of innovations coming out of India.

Another interesting thing that struck me while I was writing this – Indian English Literature has become a very significant genre now, standing on its own, and very differentiated from the past where NRIs waxed nostalgic and bitter about India.

As far as “way of life” is concerned, how is it not personal? It is your way of life, but may not be mine or anyone else’s. You have every right to lead your way of life as I have to do mine, and we also have every right not to expect any imposition of someone else’s way of life on us, right? As long as we are doing so, without infringing on anyone else, it is a personal thing.

When people start forming collectives and wanting to impose their thoughts and way of life on others, it becomes interference and intolerable.

Cheers