Theo_Fidel wrote:No one still wants to take on the question of how 60% of India became classified as bottom of the barrel.
Let me add my 2 paise.
In short it is about barbaric warmongering colonialism that has brought the society to this level.
Information link:
Indigeneous Education In The 18Th Century
So till 18th century, the situation was like quite fair, in fact in education sector there were more "Shudra" caste than others.
What happened between 18th century and today, was one of the biggest barbaric anti-human warmongering events loosely called as 'colonialism'.
The effect of colonialism is not hidden. Amongst the richest in the world, Indians was enslaved and exploited to the maximum, and it is indeed tragedy of the world that it had religious authority.
‘Popular Education’ even at this period was still approached as a missionary enterprise, meaning the maxim was ‘that every child should learn to read the Bible’. After some time attention was focused on daily schools. Things moved hereon, nevertheless, as late as 1834, “the curriculum in the better class of national schools was limited in the main to religious instruction, reading & arithmetic, in some country schools writing was excluded for fear of evil consequences”
This was the state of affairs in those barbaric times in UK.
The tables in the link show how well and varied the subjects were taught across India.
On the other hand, refer this
link per the same, at the bottom conclusion is that
• Sudras made up 45% of the scholars as compared to Brahmins 23%, today is probably the reverse.
...
• 12500 schools & colleges. The British first killed these institutions, then brought in Anglicized education into India through the missionaries.
This is why the current education system, built blood and ashes of the earlier one, can never reduce poverty. It is indeed strange that religious authorities that once opposed sciences and maths are in the lead to teach maths & science.
Also by the last page per it
link:
Efforts were made by the government to confine higher education and secondary education, leading to higher education, to boys in affluent circumstances… Rules were made calculated to restrict the diffusion of education generally and among the poorer boys in particular. Conditions for “recognition” for grants-stiff and various-were laid down and enforced, and the non-fulfillment of any one of these conditions was liable to be followed by serious consequences. Fees were raised to a degree, which, considering the circumstances of the classes that resort to schools, were abnormal. When it was objected that minimum fee would be a great hardship to poor students the answer was such students had no business to receive that kind of education. Managers of private schools, who remitted fees in whole or in part, were penalized by reduced grants-in-aid.
Such barbaric differences were introduced during the barbaric colonial times.
The Anglicized education is thus meant to perpetuate this, not overcome it. One can not perpetuate such a system and then ask who did it?
While we are at it, can we ask the same question about the global village too? Or is it haraam?
Why do some countries control oil trade & technologies? Is it not 'unfair', keeping other humans from learning and becoming as rich? Is it not barbaric at global village level? Why this change in behavior from global village to the nation?
The difference between Brahmins at global level and the upper caste in India is nothing but religion. Can I ask the same question then, w.r.t. global village, why do Hindus have to go through this barbarism in trade and technology?
This is just about education. In which other country there is history of kings of 'Shudra' caste? In which other country there is this idea of 'Sarve Dharma Sama Bhava'? Indeed it could be just that the poor have found the best of worlds not based on religion but Dharma in India and India alone.
Please give reference before comparing.
