Social Reengineering in India during and post British Rule

[Jarita]

Would like to start a thread on Social Reengineering in India during and post British Rule. We all need to understand shift in perspective from the true Bharatiya perspective.
One of the efforts underway is representation of non-Muslim rulars in Indian History Books. The South Indian rulars are given a miss.
Would be great to compile the various attempts at the same.
Some examples of countries that have gone through significant social reengineering are - China and of course Pakistan. Add several African countries to the mix. Historically Germany (Nazi's), Khmer Rouge, Russia et al

The goals of this thread are to understand
- What are the types of social engineering that have happened in India and are happening?
- What are the channels through which these are being actioned?
- Who/what are the direct drivers of this?
- What is the likely impact?
- Who are the beneficiaries/root causes?

Wiki def
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_eng ... l_science)

Extremely intensive social engineering campaigns occurred in countries with authoritarian governments. In the 1920s, the government of the Soviet Union embarked on a campaign to fundamentally alter the behavior and ideals of Soviet citizens, to replace the old social frameworks of Tsarist Russia with a new Soviet culture, to create the New Soviet man. The Soviets used newspapers, books, film, mass relocations, and even architectural design tactics to serve as "social condenser" and change personal values and private relationships. Similar examples are the Chinese "Great Leap Forward" and "Cultural Revolution" program and the Khmer Rouge's plan of deurbanization of Cambodia. In Singapore, the government's housing policies attempt to promote a mix of all races within each subsidized housing district in order to foster social cohesion and national loyalty while providing the citizens with affordable housing.[citation needed]

Non-authoritarian regimes tend to rely on more sustained social engineering campaigns that create more gradual, but ultimately as far-reaching, change. Examples include the "War on Drugs" in the United States, the increasing reach of intellectual property rights and copyright, and the promotion of elections as a political tool. The campaign for promoting elections, which is by far the most successful of the three examples, has been in place for over two centuries. Social theorists of the Frankfurt School in Weimar Germany like Theodor Adorno had also observed the new phenomenon of mass culture and commented on its new manipulative power, when the rise of the Nazis drove them out of the country around 1930 (many of them became connected with the Institute for Social Research in the United States). The Nazis themselves were no strangers to the idea of influencing political attitudes and re-defining personal relationships. The Nazi propaganda machine under Joseph Goebbels was a synchronized, sophisticated and effective tool for creating public opinion.

http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/04/te ... change.htm
Additional funding for the IBO has come from 14 other major national governments, including the United Kingdom, Japan, and Canada. Monies have also been funneled in through contributions from the Goldman Sachs Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the US Agency for International Development, the Armand Hammer Foundation and the Armand Hammer United World College, the United Nations International School, the New York Times Foundation, Gulf Canada, the IBM World Trade Organization, and many others. (14) Obviously, incorporating a global mind-change educational agenda carries a hefty price tag - and it's no surprise that heavy financial hitters are involved in the play.

[shiv]

This may sound facetious - but it is a serious question because nobody has answered this without managing to get himself into a chakravyuha.

What is a "true bharatiya perspective"?

Last time around nobody was able to say what is Hindutva. Nobody has been able to say what is Dharma. Both those have now been discarded for the latest fashion - the "bharatiya perspective". I would like to know what it is supposed to be.

I have seen too many such threads fall by the wayside because of artificial cuckoo land constructs. IMHO it would be far better for someone to lay down the meaning of oddball expressions like "True Bharatiya perspective" (TPB) before asking that one should talk about it. Typically what happens is that a whole lot of people say different things and some set of judges sit by and say "No this is not TBP! You are a DIE!" or "Aaaah - thank you - this is TBP - you are a true lover of matrhubhoomi"

The thread becomes a series of mental experiments in which some things are knocked down because they cause taqleef while other things causing a warm fuzzy are preserved as TBP.

[sanjaychoudhry]

This is a very serious and important topic. How we view ourselves today is largely determined by the intellectual output during British rule by White missionaries and church-oriented Western historians as well as the social engineering projects of the Raj government (such as through census which deliberately included questions that the British rejected for their own census back home).

One of the most important aspects of British social engineering was to cause massive illiteracy in India. Indians were almost universally literate in the late 18th century when the Brits captured political power in some provinces. Within a 100 years, by 1905, they had managed to bring the literacy rate down to only six percent for all of India.

The other aspect of their social engineering was to trigger massive poverty by exitinguishing tradional economy through punitive taxes and denial of permission to produce. Within a century of their capturing political power, they had managed to create massive poverty and illiteracy, even as proportionately the wealth of Britian rose within the same period.

[Jarita]

Shiv,
I don't know what the true Bharatiya Perspective is. I am part of the ultra brainwashed - introduction of star TV generation and have spent the last few years trying to unlearn whatever I learnt at school and college. I can only use a few fragments to try and anchor things at this point of time. There are no rights and wrongs here

- Idea of Bharat as a sacred land. Not just a piece of geography but manifestation of the mother divine herself. Bharat essentially shakti
- Dharma, artha, kama, moksha as the fundamentals for a Bharatiya
- Duty based society vs. rights based (atleast historically). Please note, that there is no word for thank you. Dhanyawaad and other stuff came later

More as I think through this. It's a good question. However, more knowledgable folks should illustrate.
Maybe Dharampals "Beautiful Tree' will have some clues.

Infact one of the ways of identifying the TBP is through the process of retracing. We explore a social reengineering that occured and then go back to what it was prior to the action. Somewhere we will come across the truth. We may not like it but it will be the truth

[Jarita]

One of the most important aspect of British social engineering was to cause massive illiteracy in India. Indians was almost universally literate in late 18th century when the Brits captured political power in some provinces. Within a100 years, they have managed to bring the literacy rate down to only six percent for all of India.

How did they drive that? The factors they were able to influence to diminish literacy are the aspects of social engineering. Reducing literacy is the end goal.

[shiv]

Shiv,
I don't know what the true Bharatiya Perspective is. I am part of the ultra brainwashed - introduction of star TV generation and have spent the last few years trying to unlearn whatever I learnt at school and college. I can only use a few fragments to try and anchor things at this point of time. There are no rights and wrongs here

Let me say something that is generally disliked by people who try to search for some single unifying core truth of India. Brainwashed or not, India is a mosaic and if you have X number of people who imagine that something represents the truth, you haev Y, Z, A, B, C and D numbers of people who disagree and say something else is the truth. Every single one of these groups will have a strong argument to support their view. That is why these discussion can get nowhere unless you ban alternate viewpoints.

I think it is pointless to use Nazi examples. The US today is the product of a particular brand of brainwashing. So is Britain. All religions are forms of brainwashing. All schooling is brainwashing. he existence of human groups called nation states is brainwashing. We are all brainwashed to a greater or lesser extent.

It seems to me that this topic is typically aimed at hounding out only certain things that are termed as brainwashing but hesitate to root out other evidence of brainwashing because there is a cut off date before which all brainwashing is not called brainwashing but is called the truth. We have trodden this path many times before.

[shiv]

Let me ask another question:

What is India's cutoff date?

What is the date before which India had a true bharatiya perspective and after which date India was screwed/brainwashed/conquered/changed/engineered etc?

[Jarita]

It seems to me that this topic is typically aimed at hounding out only certain things that are termed as brainwashing but hesitate to root out other evidence of brainwashing because there is a cut off date before which all brainwashing is not called brainwashing but is called the truth. We have trodden this path many times before.[/quote]


I am afraid I disagree. By stating this you are saying that we should keep eating our chai pakoras while bollywood shows cute jihadi - heathen love stories and while our educated elite are being told that bharatiya culture is nonsense and needs reconstruction. This one of the root causes of the friggin red corridor in India and the acceptance of it by our intellectuals. This is also one of the root causes of why Kashmir is not fully integrated. If most Indians felt strongly about it, it would have been integrated.
We've only been reactionary. We go to the battlefield and lose our best people. That's what we have done. Civilizations invest a lot in researching and countering these actions if they are to survive. There is seedling effort going on in the west on Indias behalf - Rajiv Malhotras Infinity Foundation is trying to counter this, but it is a drop in the ocean.
While we need a multi-pronged approach to solve these problems, we cannot afford to be reactionary anymore.
Additionally, disagree with your perspective that India is a disaggregated mosaic. There is a common thread running through our civilization and we've got to unearth it and study actions that have been taken to weaken this. Trust me, our enemies have studied us very very well.
You will be shocked at the research that went on prior to the implementation of the Joshua project in India. They know us a lot better than we know ourselves of them.
Perhaps all past discussions were for naught but this will lead us somewhere.

[Jarita]

Let me ask you.
Even if you believe India is a mosaic, what are the attributes of Indian civilization that are/were most precious and valuable to you? Then individually, we can work are preserving that which is precious to us.
Let me tell you what is precious to me
- Hindu dharma is intrinsic to India.
- Respect and sensitivity towards animals/plants/ environment is important because that ensures sustainability
- Intellectual quest shown by the likes of Aryabhatt et al is important

I think if we all list what we find valuable, we will identify attributes of the true bharatiya perspective

[Virupaksha]

Let me ask another question:

What is India's cutoff date?

What is the date before which India had a true bharatiya perspective and after which date India was screwed/brainwashed/conquered/changed/engineered etc?

Now Shiv, let me invert these questions.

Should a true bharatiya perspective have a cut off date? What if that perspective was always there but only comes into prominence now and then?

What was Chanakya's life all about? My knowledge of Chanakya is very less. So Please excuse me on this. Did the Nandas have a different perspective?

All I am asking is, does a bharatiya perspective have a cut off date. or is it one of the ideas which floats around for centuries and comes into prominence at different times.

If we see it from this approach, can we take the "screwed/brainwashed/conquered/changed/engineered" change be taken as the growth of an idea which is far away or even hurtful to the coming into prominence of bharatiya perspective?

If one takes the view as I mentioned above, then unfortunately, your question of this cut off date is one plain word, nonsense.

Shiv, unfortunately you had used the same rhetoric before in some other thread, so I was ready with the counter rhetoric

[shiv]

I am afraid I disagree. By stating this you are saying that we should keep eating our chai pakoras while bollywood shows cute jihadi - heathen love stories and while our educated elite are being told that bharatiya culture is nonsense and needs reconstruction.

It is easy for me to say that you too may be brainwashed and therefore your words are a product of the peculiar brainwashing you have received. Why should my brainwashed brain accept anything that you brainwashed words tell me?

There is a fundamental problem in saying

"I was brainwahsed. Now I am unbrainwashed and I will attempt to clean others brains"

or

"I am not brainwashed (now or ever) and I will clean others brains"

What make you think you are right and others wrong.

[shiv]

Let me ask you.

Let me tell you what is precious to me
- Hindu dharma is intrinsic to India.

What is dharma?

[shiv]

Should a true bharatiya perspective have a cut off date?

NO.

Let me (since you ask) accept all arguments that do not seek to assign a cut off date.

Now tell me what this "Bharatiya perspective"?

[Virupaksha]

Now tell me what this "Bharatiya perspective"?

Let me just say upfront, it is for me still a hazy idea, of which I feel somethings should be core and somethings not. and I bet even you understand some contours of it, though we may differ on some the exact shape of it.

What was it which made Chanakya run to Bihar(magadha) when Sindh was attacked? Was Chanakya's perspective different from what Shivaji thought and tried to do? Why were the yavanas/britishers treated as non-bharatiya?

And let me ask some thing else. Should everything be perfectly defined to make sense? I cant define, what love or friendship or loyalty is? I also only have a hazy idea about them, of which I feel somethings should be core and somethings not.

I am but a blind man of hindustan trying to understand it.

[sanjaychoudhry]

How did they drive that? The factors they were able to influence to diminish literacy are the aspects of social engineering. Reducing literacy is the end goal.

They derecognised traditional village schools that existed all over India and stopped the system of grants that sustained them. Only those schools that were patterned on the British system were henceforth recognised by the government for employement and state support. Within 50 years, almost all village schools had died down, leaving Indians nowhere to go to get educated.

Dharampal's seminal work "Beautiful Tree" is available online at:

http://www.samanvaya.com/dharampal/

(Click on 'published works')

It is based on the letters that the East Indian Company officers wrote to London over several decades. They described in detail the kind of India as they found it. The book shows how the Brits went about systematically destroying Indian education.

[sanjaychoudhry]

Better to restrict this thread to facts about social engineering of the Brits on Indians and how it changed our views about ourselves, rather than philosophical questions about what is Bhartiya perspective, what is love and friendship, etc.

[shiv]

And let me ask some thing else. Should everything be perfectly defined to make sense? I cant define, what love or friendship or loyalty is? I also only have a hazy idea about them, of which I feel somethings should be core and somethings not.

No.

Everything need not be perfectly defined to make some sense. But the better defined something is the more easy it is to identify it an preserve it or destroy it as one might want to do.

One of the reasons I come out so strongly against fuzzy concepts is that they are too easy to tear down because the devil is in the details. As long as one does a tippy-toe around the details all seems fine. When one starts defining the details - you find, even within what is often projected as "true bharatiya stuff", that there is some good stuff that must be retained and some unpalatable stuff that needs to be thrown out. When I speak of stuff that needs to be retained or thrown out we start getting disagreements. And when we have disagreements it is easier to start tippy-toeing around details and worshipping a fuzzy whole.

To my mind, "Dharma" involves seeking what is right, just, true and righteous. If we really seek what is "right, just, true and righteous" we will find that all the influences that Indians have had are a mixed bag, some good some bad. We cannot reject any single influence without throwing out some good along with the bad. What we need to do is to seek what is right and what is wrong. Not who brought in what influence.

The "ancients" who spoke of dharma were not stupid. Indeed it is likely that we who use the word dharma lightly who are the actual stupids. Dharma is not just a word - it is a series of attitudes and actions. It allows one to ask uncomfortable questions. Is dharma secular? Is dharma a religion? What is a religion? Are religions adharmic? Can a person be part dharmic and part adharmic? Can a religion have dharmic and adharmic aspects?

If you ask my opinion "dharma" allows too much intellectual freedom to be a winning ideology. It is not an ideology after all. It is a set of principles of truth and righteousness that do not discriminate between people, their origins, ethnicities and beliefs.

By all means try to mould people's thoughts, actions and beliefs. By all means try and prove that the influences they have, British, Islamic or whatever are wrong. But just don't willy nilly call it dharma and claim to be performing dharmic work without being asked to be accounatble.

Therein lies the rub. If you are not dharmic, do you really have an Indic or Bharatiya perspective?

[shiv]

Better to restrict this thread to facts about social engineering of the Brits on Indians and how it changed our views about ourselves, rather than philosophical questions about what is Bhartiya perspective, what is love and friendship, etc.

Cut off date exists.

[Virupaksha]

Better to restrict this thread to facts about social engineering of the Brits on Indians and how it changed our views about ourselves, rather than philosophical questions about what is Bhartiya perspective, what is love and friendship, etc.

Cut off date exists.

cut off date of what?

I dont see him assuming that "Bharatiya Perspective" is the idea which is held one nano second prior to the british dominance in India. As I see it, he is talking about the "new divergence" so as to try to understand.

[Virupaksha]

Shiv,

Let me try in another fashion.

You are not happy with the fuzzy definitions. But the whole Indian history has been built on these fuzzy foundations. Even when Rama ruled or the war of Mahabharat was fought, notice the most pre eminent kingdoms ruled only over parts of India. How many of us have read the Gita or even touched a veda? How many of us can say that our "rules" flow from them? Even their concept is interesting? Why are their Sritis and Smritis? With the Sritis as unchangeable but Smritis, the interpretations from day one can be changed any day? May be Indians are used to these and comfortable in those settings only.

You may be right. That we need definitions in todays setting. May be, the onus for the same has been left for us!! May be the need of the hour is "Shiv smriti"? May be the tearing down of details, disagreements are part of developing the same.

Let me take a first shot at it. The ideology which thinks of India as one and projects itself as a pre eminent power culturally, militarily, politically in the near abroad.

let me give you the problems in the above definition myself! It comes very close to the british empire as it was, but only replaced by an Indian empire. It also makes India as a history less nation. But a definition, by definition, should be a self- explanatory one, i.e. for understanding one definition, I should not be referring to two-three definitions.

[samuel]

Thanks for starting this topic.
Today, we see that in just a few years, probably less than 10, USA is able to restructure governance and behavior in many countries. We've seen this in Japan, Germany, Philippines, and probably Iraq, may be Korea too. Whereas these are "engineered" to some degree too, for our country that has been ruled by British for approximately 200 years, about 6 generations, there can be little doubt that "selection" took place to promote a class of "favorable" over others. Who were they? What are their attitudes and what methods and views did the British hold in engineering it?

I would like to learn, especially if the continuance of these attitudes today on this forum and in society, government or military keeps us "oriented to the west," and making the "development" of India a "global affair" in which every one who has screwed with us, and who wishes to, finds it acceptable to come on in and have fun, exclusively, as shown by history at our expense.

S

[shiv]

I would like to learn, especially if the continuance of these attitudes today on this forum and in society, government or military keeps us "oriented to the west," and making the "development" of India a "global affair" in which every one who has screwed with us, and who wishes to, finds it acceptable to come on in and have fun, exclusively, as shown by history at our expense.

S

Samuel these have been discussed time and again on this forum. I am quite happy to join it again - but the last time around (and every time) the conclusions were not necessarily "happy" for anyone who is looking for _a_particular_conclusion_ that can be translated as "good" or "bad"

• Those whom the Brits influenced in some specific ways managed to get an advantage over those whom they influenced less.
• Those who were influenced less (in those ways) are now trying to get those advantages
• There is some truth in the theory that those who gained from British influence were already in an advantaged position and merely maintained and furthered their advantages
• Since British influence led to advantages for some, and are seen as a route to advantage by others, attempting to remove all British influence is (to state my opinion bluntly) not going to work

[brihaspati]

shivji,
I think I have given a minimalist answer/proposition to the problem of defining "Hindutva" and "dharma" in the "core-" threads. However the debate to flesh it out or deconstruct, did not take place. I think that part of that discussion overlaps with the questions in this thread.

Social engineering/re-engineering can only be identified if we have already identified what "was" engineered to "something" else. I do not think that social re-engineering is a smooth and complete process. Ideas and concepts from days before the attempt persist within engineered forms making it very difficult to identify where and when the engineering actually took place. Then there are limits to scope in engineering. For example certain items of "external" engineering would be easy to produce - British mosaic adaptation of European clothes copied eagerly/forced upon a certain class of Indians during the "raj" - just the same way this class adopted Persian/Central Asian elements in dress code under the Islamic regimes. These are items easier to compromise on - but attempts at engineering food styles would be much more difficult. For the latter is much more intimately connected to local geography.

But where things get absolutely murky is in the realm of abstract ideas/principles/concepts which do not have a direct impact on daily life, but have much more subtle and longer term influences or impacts. As far as is known, not under EIC, but at least under the Empire, the concept of "bribes" became unseated as a fundamental lubricant of interaction between citizens and the rashtryia machinery at the "British" functionary level. The reason why it could be maintained is a different question - and OT here (the independence of functionaries from pressure groups or elected representatives). But even after such a stringent attempt at "cleaning up" the admin, once the raj dissolved the practice came back with its full ritualized Turko-Afghan-Mughal institutional flavour.

On the otherhand, certain attempts at re-engineering actually lands up with the exact opposite of what it set out to do. For example Islamic attempts at destroying the "brahmins" and cultural /educational institutitions of Hindus ended up in a much more closed, hierarchical and ritualistic Hindu society that rigidly adhered to its practices as a measure of defence.

Certain attempts lead to developments that were not intended by the attempt itself, nor by those who change as a result. I have searched for scriptural, religious sanction for female infanticide and ritual suicide of widows within the spectrum of "Hindu" but failed to find it. (the widow-"sacrifice" comes up not as a core value but very rarely and voluntarily undertaken - with one woman opting for it while others don't under the same context - Kunti-Madri for example). The reference to actual practice comes up only after Islamic regimes become established. Coincidence? Not necessarily - if we read up the Islamic chroniclers. The Islamic project was, as typically of them, to appropriate key biological resources of others. They did the same on Indian women and Hindus. In this widows and female children were prime targets for enslavement. It is natural to understand that a society under siege militarily and constantly for its women and girls among others, will develop a tactic of killing off girl children to avoid future raids and will also prefer more male irths which the society loses in resisting or facing such raids.

[shiv]

Let me try in another fashion.

You are not happy with the fuzzy definitions. But the whole Indian history has been built on these fuzzy foundations.

<snip>

You may be right. That we need definitions in todays setting.

The reason I am demanding definitions is to screw the person who tries to make a clear definition so I can dance over his lifeless body.

All influences are fuzzy. Humans take what is advantageous to them whether the influence is Timbuktuan or British or Indic. The reject what is disadvantageous to them without bothering to see if the influence is Islamic or Indic or Mesopotamian.

Defining things like "Core Indic" and "True Bharatiya" is a dead end pursuit. I have no objection to people pursuing this definiton route if they have the intellectual courage to face up to the possibility that some core Indic/ true Bharatiya influences may show up as bad and/or negative and are best consigned to the waste bin of history. In this issue, as in any other I tend to come down heavily on intellectual dishonesty if I detect any.

[Nandu]

sanjaychoudhry, I find the idea that Indians were "almost universally literate" in the late 18th century extremely implausible. If you have strong evidence to back it up, please provide it.

[shiv]

sanjaychoudhry, I find the idea that Indians were "almost universally literate" in the late 18th century extremely implausible. If you have strong evidence to back it up, please provide it.

Nandu you have brought up (inadvertently I presume) a topic I have touched upon in past discussions that is very abstract and difficult to explain, but I am hoping that i will get better with practice as the topic comes up again and again.

Before the British came and started conducting "censuses" and tabulating "statistics" India society was never in the habit of doing any of those things. Society was society. People were people. Society was not 51% male, 49% female, 25% under 20, 5% over 70, X% Brahmin, Y% shudra, Z% SC/SC "untouchable"
The tendency to do this was not even a "British" tendency. It was the development of science and the tendiency to "classify and enumerate" everything that was appled to society as well.

A forum lurker friend of mine gave a a terrific book:

This is the link to the book on Amazon:
The Great Arc: The Dramatic Tale of How India was Mapped and Everest was Named

The reason I mention this book is that it has everything to do with how Western scientific methods changed the world and probably formed part of the "brainwashing/indoctrination" to which we have been subjected - albeit inadvertently and not necessarily to our detriment

The British started at Chennai - at sea level and drew a series of triangles all the way across India - using each triangle to survey and measure elevation. Eventually - after decades, when the triangulation reached the Himalayas, they discovered that the Himalayas had the highest mountains in the world and that an un named mountain, later called Mount Everest, after the person who started the triangulation work was the single tallest mountain in the world.

But this triangulation work was being done by all the European powers of the day. It was their science and they were mostly doing it in their own countries. But until the Brits did that by actual measurement and triangulation mountains were assessed by vision. Some guy saw the Alps at a distance and felt they were the highest, and some other guy saw the Andes from the sea and thought that was the highest.

Now you may well ask "What the hell difference does it make to anyone to know the height of mount Everest or that the Himalayas are the tallest mountain range?". And you will be right - in the overall scheme of things such facts do not matter.

The Indic way of life did not find any importance in oddball facts like whether Himalayas are higher than Andes or whether Brahmins are X percent. It was not an ignorant society. Only, its knowledge base was completely different from the Western one and its methodology was different and the importance assigned to facts was different.

So when we use the word "literate" we are exposing ourselves to the question "What does literate mean", and when you say "universal literacy" you are exposing yourself to the question, "Did you know the population of they day and how did you assess the population and the literacy to declare nearly universal literacy"?

What is happening in that statement is fractal recursivity. A British introduced method of counting and classification is being used to describe pre-British Indian society in terms that did not exist before the Brits came and in parameters that were not measured in Indian society in the way the British did. We have all changed. the way we look at the world has changed, and we are trying to figure out what it was before the change. Not easy and unless one is careful we can come up with a whole lot of bullsh1t as "conclusions"

[svinayak]

I don't know what the true Bharatiya Perspective is.
- Idea of Bharat as a sacred land. Not just a piece of geography but manifestation of the mother divine herself. Bharat essentially shakti
- Dharma, artha, kama, moksha as the fundamentals for a Bharatiya
- Duty based society vs. rights based (atleast historically). Please note, that there is no word for thank you. Dhanyawaad and other stuff came later

Thanks for starting the thread. This is my favorite topic.
Anything which is correct is true Bharatiya Perspective.

[Jarita]

Two of the most clear cut instances of social engineering in recent India are
- Creation of a new identity - Dalit. This did not exist prior to the 60's. You should also know that Colorado churches are the dominant board members of Dalit Freedom Network
- Reclassification of the Jaati system into 3/4 level caste system. There is an attempt to completely breakdown the jati system which I believe is beneficial for Bharatiya Society. These jatis are being calcified into 3- 4 categories - Brahmin, Dalit, Misc.

Additionally, Sanjay's thought around the degeneration of educational institutions is relevant but it represents multiple prongs of social engineering. I am unable to isolate them at this instance

[svinayak]

Always foreigners want to now about percentage and dimension of all things in the foreign country. "Exploration" and "conquering" are terms for looting and oppression.

[shiv]

- Creation of a new identity - Dalit. This did not exist prior to the 60's. You should also know that Colorado churches are the dominant board members of Dalit Freedom Network

I have tried to point out again and again on this forum that people should stop using the name dalit even if Colorado Churches use the. there is a group of people officially recognised in India as SC/ST. Why do you want to perpetuate that misnomer?

Could it be because - if you live in the US what is said and done in the US is much more apparent and real than what is happening in faraway India?

[Jarita]

Shiv,
Key issue is not that we at Bharat Rakshak are using a particular terminology or not. The key issue is that this identity has taken a life of its own.
We should stop using this but we need to assess the situation

[shiv]

Shiv,
Key issue is not that we at Bharat Rakshak are using a particular terminology or not. The key issue is that this identity has taken a life of its own.
We should stop using this but we need to assess the situation

Things are made to take a life of their own by certain means. After that happens it is called "brainwashing" or "psy ops". Should we too not use it in exactly the same way to achieve the opposite end?

What are the "Key issues" are the crux of the problem. What is a key issue in Colorado churches is hardly a key issue in India.

[brihaspati]

Recognizing identities always reinforces them. Dalit is an early twentieth century term. If you deparse it - it simply means "repressed". Do we clearly and firmly express this whenever we have the opportunity to do so? The word itself indicates the reason it was coined - it does not belong to any predefined or recognized "jaati" or caste. Therefore a loose term had to be coined for political mobilization that should not denote any particular caste or jaati. As mentioning any real one would jeopardize political mobilization - for even those groupings clubbed together as "dalits" have recognized enmities and claims of contested hierarchies.

I have consistently gone against recognizing the category of "dalit". We should derecognize and stop using any term that gives separate identities within India. But for me that also includes "jaatis" unless they are clearly acknowledged to be "historically claimed" ones. There were so many of them we find from the records - where are they now? Which means "jaati" categories are specific to historical times and places. They are not permanent ones.

What we do today will be followed by the rest of India in the future, if we are determined enough to persist - even if we are now a hopeless minority.

[Jarita]

Shiv,
What are the "Key issues" are the crux of the problem. What is a key issue in Colorado churches is hardly a key issue in India.

Err... I want to know what you are smokin', it sounds interesting You actually believe that Dalit is not already an identity in India.

Also, on that note, what are the key issues?

[Jarita]

Website of the Dalit Freedom Network - Very inflammatory and not accurate

http://www.dalitnetwork.org/go?/dfn/about/C9/

Board of Directors
Dalit Freedom Network Board of Directors
Bob Beltz
Advisor to the Chairman, The Anschutz Corporation
Denver, CO

Peter Dance
India Director-OM USA, Operation Mobilization
Tyrone, GA

Melody Divine, J.D.
Former Judiciary Counsel and Foreign Policy Advisor, Rep. Trent Franks, Rep-AZ
Washington, D.C.

Doug Shippee
President, Dalit Freedom Network

Joseph D’souza
International President
All India Christian Council
Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

Ken Heulitt
Chief Financial Officer, Moody Bible Institute
Chicago, IL

Gene Kissinger
Chairman of the Board
Outreach Pastor, Cherry Hills Community Church
Highlands Ranch, CO

Kumar Swamy
South India Regional Director, OM India
Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Cliff Young
Lead Singer, Caedmon’s Call
Houston, TX


For 3,000 years, I have been oppressed.The Dalit Freedom Network is a human rights, non-government organization that partners with the Dalit people in India. We represent a vast network of justice-minded, modern-day abolitionists committed to freedom for India’s “untouchables.” We believe we can end Dalit injustices, such as human trafficking and child labor, and make slavery history in India. Who are the Dalits?


Where have they come up with the 3000 years number from? What are the jaatis that comprise this? These guys have to be taken on and completely discredited.

[A_Gupta]

I think reading and understanding this essay by Prof. Balagangadhara will help in the thread-starter's quest.

http://sites.google.com/site/colonialconsciousness/colonialexperienceandtheindianrenaissance

On this page
http://sites.google.com/site/colonialconsciousness/publications
there is a link to "...We shall not cease..."

That is another essay I strongly recommend.

A Question…

But this is not what we have in mind when we speak of ‘decolonizing’ social sciences. So, what do we have in mind? Let us look at the issue this way. Without the least bit of exaggeration it could be held that the study of societies and cultures is a project initiated by the Western world. Over the centuries, Western intellectuals have studied both themselves and other cultures and, in the process of doing so, they have developed a set of theories and methodologies to understand the human world. What we call ‘social sciences’ are the result of the gigantic labour performed by brilliant and not-so-brilliant men and women from all over the world over a long period of time.

Let us formulate a hypothetical question in order to express our intuition: would the results have been the same or even approximately similar if, say, the Asians had undertaken such a task instead of the Europeans? Suppose that, in the imaginary world we are talking about, it was the effort of the Asian intellectuals reflecting about the European culture and that of their own, as they saw both, which eventuated in social sciences. Would it have looked like contemporary social sciences?

…and an Answer

I put to you that the most natural answer to the question is this: “We do not know”. It is worthwhile reflecting on this answer.

When we confess to being unable to answer the question, it does not arise from an impossibility to answer questions about hypothetical situations: all our scientific laws describe hypothetical situations and we can say what would happen in such situations. (E.g., ‘what would happen if I drop a stone from the top of a building? It would fall downwards…etc.’) Our claim to ignorance has to do with the specific kind of hypothetical situation which the question picks out, and with the feeling that there is no way to check the veracity of the answers one may give. That is, because we have no model of such an attempt, we have no way of deciding how to go about answering such a question. Worse still, because we have no models where the answers can come out either true or false, we feel that all answers to this question are meaningless and, therefore, that the question itself is meaningless. The question has not violated any syntactic or semantic rule; it has not committed any category mistake and yet we do not know how to make sense of this question.

There is a peculiar air about this state of affairs. We are not able to make sense of a question which asks us, literally, how we appear to ourselves and how the West appears to us. And yet, we have been studying both ourselves and the West for quite sometime now!

We know the West as the West looks at itself. We study the East the way West studies the East. We look at the world the way West looks at it. We do not even know whether the world would look different, if we looked at it our way. Today, we are not in a position even to make sense of the above statement. When Asian anthropologists or sociologists or culturologists do their anthropology, sociology or culturology – the West is really talking to itself.

[shiv]

Err... I want to know what you are smokin', it sounds interesting Y

You can share what I am smoking but the statement only shows that you too need to smoke something to come up with any credible information about this topic and the best you have come up with so far is a word used in Colorado churches. That is laughable as far as I am concerned - but that may be because I smoke better stuff than you do.

You don't really appear to have much information to give anybody on this topic that has been discussed to death on this forum. So its Colorado Church language that takes on new and expanded meaning.

Every asylum seeker goes to foreign shores and claims that he is victim. There is a group of people in India who will get funded to say they are "crushed dalit" to give a warm fuzzy to Colorado (whatever that is) Church goers. Rather than make the issue into a loud caterwaul how about saying why "Dalit" is wrong and how "Dalits" do or do no exist? I don't really care what they think in Colorado churches unless it has a bearing on India. I don't even know if Colorado is a person, religion or a place. What bearing does Colorado church language have on the ground in India? Obviously Coloradu Church language has managed to engineer your thoughts. How about socially engineering me so I can start thinking like you?

[shiv]

AGupta - thanks for those links. Balagangadhara IMO is the foremost thinker and the most clear-headed writer on this abstruse subject. The paragraph you have quoted had a deep effect on me when I first read it - off a link from this forum - maybe you had linked it then too about 5-6 years ago.

We know the West as the West looks at itself. We study the East the way West studies the East. We look at the world the way West looks at it. We do not even know whether the world would look different, if we looked at it our way. Today, we are not in a position even to make sense of the above statement. When Asian anthropologists or sociologists or culturologists do their anthropology, sociology or culturology – the West is really talking to itself.

I have had the opportunity to bounce my own thoughts and feelings on this subject on and off this forum time and time again. In many ways the people on this forum who point out that the "elite" are wrong and the average mango man Indian has the right idea are correct - but they too suffer from the disease that SN Balagangadhara describes in his paragraph quoted above (which is fractal recursivity defined)

The mango man ("aam aadmi" ) in India does not have the British and post independence indoctrination and is therefore able to see himself and his world more or less uncorrupted by those influences. But the mango man is not necessarily a happy man. He sees the cultural influences of the West as being the hallmark of wealth and happiness and feels the need to adopt those influences as a route to wealth, material comfort and happiness. Telling mango man that those influences are sinister and wrong and are a result of brainwashing or indoctrination will make mango man ask "What the hell are YOU smoking? You speak English, you have a college education which needs English, you wear pant-shirt and fit in with the West and you have their money and security. Who the fck are you to tell me that all this is wrong? I have no job. My kids have no education. My lands are fallow. I am in debt and you tell me that Western influences are wrong."

In other words we who speak of the evils of Western brainwashing have (to my mind) never been able to come up with arguments that show us up as being anything more than the most insincere hypocrites. That is exactly what we are. Ignorant insincere hypocrites. We (and our ancestors) have garnered all the material advantages that a Western style education gives us and having got all we need for ourselves are now beginning to question all that and claim that the West has "brainwashed us" and that we are now going to get rid of the mental baggage and teach fellow Indians that they should not carry that mental baggage.

How phenomenally hypocritical is this quest!! It is oh so easy to throw away mental baggage when your stomach is full and you personal future is secure. And guess what - the few sincere people who give up their personal wealth and status to be like mango man soon realise that mango man lives a bullsh1t life in a sh1t pit of a country full of suffering for those who do not have the minimum material things required for life. It is completely hypocritical to talk of bad influences on a full stomach without being able to offer mango man a better alternative. Someone please explain to me why people in Colorado churches are wrong in their assessment of how screwed up mango man is in India. They are right.

[svinayak]

I think reading and understanding this essay by Prof. Balagangadhara will help in the thread-starter's quest.

http://sites.google.com/site/colonialconsciousness/colonialexperienceandtheindianrenaissance

On this page
http://sites.google.com/site/colonialconsciousness/publications
there is a link to "...We shall not cease..."

I had posted earlier.

Unless Bharatiya view of the west, Bharatiya view of the UK, Bharatiya view of Christianity, Bharatiya view of Islam, Bharatiya view of Russia, Bharatiya view of China is studied and made std reading in the school for all children in Bharat that is India, nothing will change.
We have education and media which is not Bharatiya point of view.

[Jarita]

Point one is trying to make with references to the Colorado churches is that the creation of the Dalit identity is not a spontaneous Bharatiya occurance. It is something that studied and implemented by external agencies. The scholarship around this subject is dominated by churches and westerners (Till today - dominant being American, Australian, Canadian). This has also been successful. The media and chattering classes have seized on to this identity. A whole bloc is being created. This is not trivial. An attempt has been made to create a block around 20% of the population of India based on both imagined and real issues.

An example
http://www.religion-online.org/showarti ... title=1121
http://www.csichurch.com/article/dalit.htm

Dalit jesus http://www.dalitcatholicchurch.org/DalitJesus.htm



Dalits becoming christian is an interim outcome. The goal is to transition a sizeable population to an amenable monolithic group. It could very well be religion "come jump into the well". The earth loving heterogeniety of dharmic traditions or even for that matter the ancient religion of Francis Assisi is not a suitable homogeneoous ideology.