Vikram Sampath is a historic with very impressive credentials. Since yesterday he has been the subject of vicious Twitter tracks for merely arguing his POV with FACTS. Doesn't this show intolerance among left academics? Also, history is a compulsory course in NLUs, but only leftist historians are taught. Isn't it time to change that?
Also, conceding that IHC does not represent India anymore (and never did), how does that explain Legally India becoming OpIndia (the original question)?
Why are you getting defensive about OpIndia? Did I say that OpIndia is a rabid hate-mongering unofficial government mouthpiece spreading fake news and masquerading as a news outlet while making money off it? No I didn't. So please sit down.
Bro. Let me make this slow. Because your comprehension skills seem to be at an all time low.
Comment #2 : I make the comment on LI becoming OpIndia Comment #2.3 (in response to 2) : Wokes getting triggered comment by some random person. Comment #2.3.1 (in response to 2.3) : my response on why getting 2.3 is defensive about OpIndia.
And you, Sir, at 2.3.1.A are claiming that somebody didn't even reply to the comment about OpIndia.
I really hope you're working on improving your comprehension skills.
I don't really think there's any issue with what he said. He talking about increasing geographic diversity in history by including South Indian and NE Indian history. If any left intellectual had said this, it would have been celebrated with #inclusion #diversity. Hypocrisy finds its place here because it wasn't brought up by a person who dances to the woke tune. Our country has parts which are definitely dark. Hindus are chastised if they don't acknowledge their casteist history or caste privilege. The wokes find every opportunity to abuse Hinduism. But even the slightest mention of the oppressive Islamic rule in India is avoided. Double standards, yes? Unfortunately the narrative peddled today is that if you don't stand with the woke narrative you're regressive and bigoted but people have realised that it's far from the truth eventually.
As a Leftist I don't really have an issue with his point of 'reclaiming' history from Delhi. But such a statement of his simply shows ignorance. There is a very significant amount of syllabus that deals with the South Indian Kingdoms of Cholas, Cheras and Pandyas. Delhi "deserves" a special attention in our history textbooks as Delhi's geographical position is such that whosoever controlled it ruled over a major part of India. Every Kingdom aspired to capture Delhi. There has also been a lot of ups and downs in the history of Delhi wrt the rest of India. And your assumption is such that the remaining kingdoms aren't discussed in the history textbooks which is simply wrong. Moreover, your understanding of Marxist Histography is wrong in the first place. The same is of these "Hindutva Intellectuals". Marxist Histography tries to look historical societies from economic perspective unlike Communal Histography (who try to explain historical happenings from communal perspective i.e. Muslims did this to Hindus in X Empire). Application of Dialectic Materialism is the central rule to follow Marxist Histography. And your credibility dies when Sanghi historians advocate for stances like "Red Fort was a Hindu Temple" or "Taj Mahal=Tojo Mahalaya- A Shiva Temple). Moreover, the central point behind RSS Historians' ranting is their belief that Hindus have always existed in India.... The rest Muslims, Christians etc were invaders therefore Hindus should have unfettered rights over Bharata. This is wrong in its entirety, There always have been influx and outflux of people in India like any part of Earth.
The beginning of your comment about Delhi "deserving" a greater mention in history because it was strategic in nature comes from a place of giving obsessive importance to medieval Indian history over other parts of it. How many medieval South Indian kings can you cite with ease as much as you can cite North Indian kings? How clearly are you aware of say Kerala's history through your NCERT textbooks. This is not an issue of politics but a case of history being written by North Indians who are predominantly Delhi centric. There's a lot more of history about India which doesn't involve New Delhi and equally "deserves" to be in the textbooks. I find it funny that you identify as a leftist but look down upon representation in history that is taught. There are certain progressive value systems that are universal and one doesn't need to identify with an ideology to imbibe them.
Not like anyone wants to acknowledge us NE Indians anyways but some part of me dies inside me every time someone says that Delhi's culture or history or language requires more importance than the rest of the country. If I try to recollect now it's infuriating to study in a CBSE school and not notice any mention of North East Indian history throughout our schooling. Surprise surprise, a rich and glorious NE Indian history does exist and we are as Indian as any of you.
If the Leftists are SARS-CoV2, @vikramsampath and @jsaideepak are Covishield and Covaxin. Get yourself vaccinated. There is no cure for these dumb Leftists. They can only be defeated through Herd Immunity.
- JNU Professor and Cambridge PhD Anand Ranganathan
I thought JNU means anti nationals only. Then Ranganathan must be one. He certainly seems to have sub-human taste given his tendency to compare human beings with a killer virus.
Nobody intends to change history. History is a place for multiple narratives - the 'itihasa' is our tradition, which lets various historical narratives compete with each other in order to churn out the essence. Itihasa for us is that essence. However, for modern marxists, history stops at just one narrative. All the so called RWers want is to problematize the belief that a single historical narrative (i.e., historicism) shouldn't be project as the SOLE and ABSOLUTE truth, because it is anything but.
Of course. Ram could have taken Air India to fly to Lanka, but chose to end unemployment among apes by building a bridge instea. Solid RW narratives. I hear Ajay Devgn and Akshay Kumar are also contributing to a lot of those narratives these days. So is Kangana Runout.
https://photogallery.indiatimes.com/yearendershow/72319531.cms
Also, conceding that IHC does not represent India anymore (and never did), how does that explain Legally India becoming OpIndia (the original question)?
Comment #2 : I make the comment on LI becoming OpIndia
Comment #2.3 (in response to 2) : Wokes getting triggered comment by some random person.
Comment #2.3.1 (in response to 2.3) : my response on why getting 2.3 is defensive about OpIndia.
And you, Sir, at 2.3.1.A are claiming that somebody didn't even reply to the comment about OpIndia.
I really hope you're working on improving your comprehension skills.
https://twitter.com/IndiaToday/status/1446818205620707328?s=20
I don't really think there's any issue with what he said. He talking about increasing geographic diversity in history by including South Indian and NE Indian history. If any left intellectual had said this, it would have been celebrated with #inclusion #diversity. Hypocrisy finds its place here because it wasn't brought up by a person who dances to the woke tune.
Our country has parts which are definitely dark. Hindus are chastised if they don't acknowledge their casteist history or caste privilege. The wokes find every opportunity to abuse Hinduism. But even the slightest mention of the oppressive Islamic rule in India is avoided. Double standards, yes?
Unfortunately the narrative peddled today is that if you don't stand with the woke narrative you're regressive and bigoted but people have realised that it's far from the truth eventually.
Moreover, your understanding of Marxist Histography is wrong in the first place. The same is of these "Hindutva Intellectuals". Marxist Histography tries to look historical societies from economic perspective unlike Communal Histography (who try to explain historical happenings from communal perspective i.e. Muslims did this to Hindus in X Empire). Application of Dialectic Materialism is the central rule to follow Marxist Histography.
And your credibility dies when Sanghi historians advocate for stances like "Red Fort was a Hindu Temple" or "Taj Mahal=Tojo Mahalaya- A Shiva Temple).
Moreover, the central point behind RSS Historians' ranting is their belief that Hindus have always existed in India.... The rest Muslims, Christians etc were invaders therefore Hindus should have unfettered rights over Bharata. This is wrong in its entirety, There always have been influx and outflux of people in India like any part of Earth.
I find it funny that you identify as a leftist but look down upon representation in history that is taught. There are certain progressive value systems that are universal and one doesn't need to identify with an ideology to imbibe them.
- JNU Professor and Cambridge PhD Anand Ranganathan
https://twitter.com/ARanganathan72/status/1448288590341951491